Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[TMC]

7 hours ago, MTA Researcher said:

Aha! You see now folks? This is why 57 St Flip MUST Happen.

The issue is that it's not necessary, you gain capacity by not having Broadway share with the . It's really just extra money. 

 

 

7 hours ago, MTA Researcher said:

If I miscalculated the TPH; how can I calculate TPH correctly? I base my proposals on instinct…

Tracks can handle 30 TPH, you want to split the TPH such that they are either equal or multiples of the other (a split of 15/15 TPH works, 6/6/12 TPH works too, 3/8 TPH does not work). Typically, you want to avoid having more than two routes interlining on a piece of track on a subway system, to keep branch frequency high. However, I do have a 5/5/5 TPH split between Lefferts, Far Rockaway, and Rockaway Park for the , killing off the shuttle. Reverse-branching reduces capacity, due to requiring many different merges in quick succession, so realistically, a 30 TPH line becomes a 20-24 TPH line, even though the signals can handle 30 TPH (they can actually handle up to 40 TPH, but that's the limit, and it's not worth purchasing the extra equipment to delete 30 seconds off of headways, when there's no need for that kind of capacity). 

[TMC]

9 hours ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

I also think when making deinterlining plans, it's important to consider not all transfers are equal.

The MTA considers cross-platform transfers to have 0 transfer penalty, even at current frequencies. Even with long transfers, passengers weigh the transfer time 1.75 times as much as they do the time spent riding on the trains. So, a two-seat ride that is quicker, or less than 1.75 times as much as a comparable one-seat ride is preferable.

[LGA Link N Train]

Here’s a rather pointless proposal that I’ll throw out (because I’m bored). How much it’ll cost and the impacts it’ll have System-Wide and wether or not it is even feasible to begin with are things that I will not be accounting for here so enjoy.
 

A portion A1 and A2 Tracks along 8th Avenue is removed from North of 50th Street to right where the ‘s D3/D4 Tracks Join 8th Avenue. In place of the Absent Portions of A1/A2 Tracks will be extended Platforms for 50th Street. As for A1/A2 NORTH of 50th Street, they will join A3/A4 Tracks via new Switches as to not hit a dead end. At this point, the Station would Act a LOT like the IND Nostrand Avenue Station in Brooklyn. The only real Service Change here at the BARE MINIMUM would be that  and Late Night  Trains would now run express between 59th Street-Columbus Circle to Hoyt-Schemerhorn. For any of you folks that love to deinterline the system, here’s a nice starting grounds for you so go crazy.

[MTA Researcher]

11 minutes ago, LGA Link N Train said:

Here’s a rather pointless proposal that I’ll throw out (because I’m bored). How much it’ll cost and the impacts it’ll have System-Wide and wether or not it is even feasible to begin with are things that I will not be accounting for here so enjoy.
 

A portion A1 and A2 Tracks along 8th Avenue is removed from North of 50th Street to right where the ‘s D3/D4 Tracks Join 8th Avenue. In place of the Absent Portions of A1/A2 Tracks will be extended Platforms for 50th Street. As for A1/A2 NORTH of 50th Street, they will join A3/A4 Tracks via new Switches as to not hit a dead end. At this point, the Station would Act a LOT like the IND Nostrand Avenue Station in Brooklyn. The only real Service Change here at the BARE MINIMUM would be that  and Late Night  Trains would now run express between 59th Street-Columbus Circle to Hoyt-Schemerhorn. For any of you folks that love to deinterline the system, here’s a nice starting grounds for you so go crazy.

*sigh* I thought that you were sticking to the status quo. But since you say you are bored; let us talk!

 

Call me ignorant, but in this proposal; I assume you are eliminating the lower level? Or vice versa?

 

Speaking of 8 Av, how would you rate the following proposal?

  unchanged

 BPB - WTC: local

 JC - Euclid Av: QBL/8 Av Exp - Fulton St Lcl

 

From my eyes; this allows for 8 Av to have access to local and express going upper manhattan and preserves 6 Av to go express along CPW and into Bronx. Queens Benefits from this as they have direct access to Midtown Express, not to mention upper and lower levels of 50 St have service. Only downside is the second CPW local would have to be eliminated unless we connect Broadway Local north of 57 St/7 Av to CPW local. There are provisions north of 57 St that could allow something like that to happen.

[Kamen Rider]

Except that provision north of 57/7 was cut into to build the 63rd street line.

It’s impossible to use it, as the active tracks cut through the unused trackways at what would have been grade level. Going over 63rd would be too steep a grade and going under, would not have the clearance between the two existing routes.

 

literally the only was to do it would be for the northbound track to follow the curve with 63rd street tracks, drop under the tracks coming from sixth and make a giant u-turn to the west…

 

and all of this under Central Park… which you may recall people were not happy with us digging the tunnels that are already there under.

 

[Wallyhorse]

And speaking of 63rd Street 

I would have built that with provisions if not there now to extend to 8th Avenue so 8th Avenue trains could access 63rd from both directions if necessary (and also allowed Broadway Line trains to also access 8th Avenue north of 57/7). 

[Kamen Rider]

… let’s just dig up all of Central Park while we’re at it…

[LGA Link N Train]

On 11/11/2023 at 11:07 PM, MTA Researcher said:

*sigh* I thought that you were sticking to the status quo. But since you say you are bored; let us talk!

I was being satire when I said that.

On 11/11/2023 at 11:07 PM, MTA Researcher said:

Call me ignorant, but in this proposal; I assume you are eliminating the lower level? Or vice versa?

Ok, allow me to back track and add some context cause I don't think you understood the proposal.

For Context, tracks in the New York City Subway follow a certain pattern with chains being used to represent the Segment of a line. In the A Divison, tracks are normally labled "1, 2, 3, 4" (1 and 2 Tracks for Southbound Travel and 3 and 4 Tracks for Northbound Travel) if we're talking about a trunk line or "1, M, 2" for Triple Tracked portions of lines. On the B Division, Tracks are Ordered as "1, 3, 4, 2" for Trunk Lines (and "1, 3-4, 2" for Triple Tracked Sections), similar rule applies here but with the order Switched as Tracks 1 and 3 are Southbound and 4 and 2 are Northbound. 

Now each segment of a line follows what is called a "Chain" which in laymens terms, is used to measure how long a portion of track lasts from a specific Starting Point. It can get confusing when certain lines start with the same letter for a Chain, for example the BMT A chain represents the Broadway Line while the IND A Chain represents the 8th Avenue/Fulton Street Lines. So that in mind, tracks would be numbered "A1 Track" or "A2 Track", etc.. 

What I am proposing is that a portion of A1 and A2 Track (which in this context are the 8th Avenue Local Tracks) are removed in 50th Street with the exchange of Extended Platforms and 2 New Switches North of the Station merging A1 with A3 and A2 with A4 Tracks. 50th Lower Level from where the Branches off from the and  into the station uses D3 and D4 Tracks, which are part of the IND D Chain, which consists of every piece of track starting from 50th-8th LL up until Jamaica-179th Street. D1 and D2 Tracks start just NORTH of Court Square on the indicating thats where the Crosstown Line ends and where the Queens Blvd Local Tracks begin. 

On 11/11/2023 at 11:07 PM, MTA Researcher said:

Speaking of 8 Av, how would you rate the following proposal?

  unchanged

 BPB - WTC: local

 JC - Euclid Av: QBL/8 Av Exp - Fulton St Lcl

From my eyes; this allows for 8 Av to have access to local and express going upper manhattan and preserves 6 Av to go express along CPW and into Bronx. Queens Benefits from this as they have direct access to Midtown Express, not to mention upper and lower levels of 50 St have service. Only downside is the second CPW local would have to be eliminated unless we connect Broadway Local north of 57 St/7 Av to CPW local. There are provisions north of 57 St that could allow something like that to happen.

Main Problem with this proposal is that Cranberry doesn't have the space to fit that many Trains. To my knowledge and with the current set up, Cranberry only has the Capacity to fit 26 TPH. Cramming 2 of the busiest lines in the system would not do well for riders of either line as you'd have to reduce Capacity on both although I'm unsure if any outside factors play into mind such as the Track Geometry Surrounding Canal Street on the and and whatnot. Plus you'd be having the do more than it should.

As for Uptown, I'm assuming you want to swap the and  again? Once we get all 211's on the Property and Trains are extended to 10 Cars, sure no Problem but I'd Hold off until then. Also that last part I'm Crossing out entirely because I believe that Broadway Service should Have NO Business reverse branching onto CPW. 

[LGA Link N Train]

A more mundane proposal…. Coming to think of it, most of my proposals have become increasingly Mundane as of late whenever I do propose something.

Alright, so check it out. Norwood-205th Street was never intended to be a Terminal Station. This is evident by the fact that there is a max capacity of 10 TPH that can be turned around if I’m not mistaken. If anyone knows from previous proposals, the IND Concourse Line was planned to go past 205th and under Burke Avenue to at the very least Gun Hill Road. 

Another thing that makes 205th a bad terminal is that it doesn’t have Crew Rooms or space for any to my knowledge. Thus,  train Crews will have to change at Bedford Park, thus adding to Dwell times in that station. 
 

I propose adding 1 Extra stop on the Concourse Line, we’ll call it “Williamsbridge-White Plains Road”!

Williamsbridge-White Plains Road would achieve a few things here. First and foremost, the track and platform layout will be set up like 34th Street-Hudson Yards on the , with Diamond Crossovers on both ends of an Island Platform Station with at least 1500’ worth of Layup Tracks to store an extra 4 trains During Off Peak Hours. 
 

In the Mezzanine Level, the main thing that will be included is a Transfer to Burke Avenue Station on the  and  to allow passengers to transfer, but thats not the main point of why I’m proposing this station. Although the added transfer would be a bonus. What WILL be included on the Mezzanine is an additional Room for Crews to Switch out between Trains, maybe a back up Dispatch Tower, although that might be unnecessary with Bedford Park being the primary Tower for Concourse I presume. Last But not least, in the same area that the new Crew Room would be located, you can also throw in a Signal, Track and/or Third Rail Quarters for good Measure. 
 

Anyways, TL;DR, extend the  East to White Plains Road to build a new Crew Room and give it a better Terminal in the process, the added transfer to the  and  is just a bonus.

[MTA Rail Fan]

41 minutes ago, LGA Link N Train said:

I propose adding 1 Extra stop on the Concourse Line, we’ll call it “Williamsbridge-White Plains Road”!

Williamsbridge-White Plains Road would achieve a few things here. First and foremost, the track and platform layout will be set up like 34th Street-Hudson Yards on the , with Diamond Crossovers on both ends of an Island Platform Station with at least 1500’ worth of Layup Tracks to store an extra 4 trains During Off Peak Hours. 
 

In the Mezzanine Level, the main thing that will be included is a Transfer to Burke Avenue Station on the  and  to allow passengers to transfer, but thats not the main point of why I’m proposing this station. Although the added transfer would be a bonus. What WILL be included on the Mezzanine is an additional Room for Crews to Switch out between Trains, maybe a back up Dispatch Tower, although that might be unnecessary with Bedford Park being the primary Tower for Concourse I presume. Last But not least, in the same area that the new Crew Room would be located, you can also throw in a Signal, Track and/or Third Rail Quarters for good Measure.

In response to this, I will say that the new terminal will benefit  riders with the extra TPH they're receiving. A Concourse Extension is needed, given the need for more TPH within that corridor and how 205th functions. It could also be noted that the Concourse Line can possibly turn via Webster Avenue and operate further north. It might be operating parallel to the  and  train on WPR, but at least it might do something in relieving crowding and putting riders into more alternatives. 

[MTA Researcher]

On 11/15/2023 at 2:53 PM, LGA Link N Train said:

Ok, allow me to back track and add some context cause I don't think you understood the proposal.

For Context, tracks in the New York City Subway follow a certain pattern with chains being used to represent the Segment of a line. In the A Divison, tracks are normally labled "1, 2, 3, 4" (1 and 2 Tracks for Southbound Travel and 3 and 4 Tracks for Northbound Travel) if we're talking about a trunk line or "1, M, 2" for Triple Tracked portions of lines. On the B Division, Tracks are Ordered as "1, 3, 4, 2" for Trunk Lines (and "1, 3-4, 2" for Triple Tracked Sections), similar rule applies here but with the order Switched as Tracks 1 and 3 are Southbound and 4 and 2 are Northbound. 

Now each segment of a line follows what is called a "Chain" which in laymens terms, is used to measure how long a portion of track lasts from a specific Starting Point. It can get confusing when certain lines start with the same letter for a Chain, for example the BMT A chain represents the Broadway Line while the IND A Chain represents the 8th Avenue/Fulton Street Lines. So that in mind, tracks would be numbered "A1 Track" or "A2 Track", etc.. 

What I am proposing is that a portion of A1 and A2 Track (which in this context are the 8th Avenue Local Tracks) are removed in 50th Street with the exchange of Extended Platforms and 2 New Switches North of the Station merging A1 with A3 and A2 with A4 Tracks. 50th Lower Level from where the Branches off from the and  into the station uses D3 and D4 Tracks, which are part of the IND D Chain, which consists of every piece of track starting from 50th-8th LL up until Jamaica-179th Street. D1 and D2 Tracks start just NORTH of Court Square on the indicating thats where the Crosstown Line ends and where the Queens Blvd Local Tracks begin. 

In other words 50 St becomes an express stop?

 

On 11/15/2023 at 2:53 PM, LGA Link N Train said:

Main Problem with this proposal is that Cranberry doesn't have the space to fit that many Trains. To my knowledge and with the current set up, Cranberry only has the Capacity to fit 26 TPH. Cramming 2 of the busiest lines in the system would not do well for riders of either line as you'd have to reduce Capacity on both although I'm unsure if any outside factors play into mind such as the Track Geometry Surrounding Canal Street on the and and whatnot. Plus you'd be having the do more than it should.

So it wouldn’t be possible to run  together via 8 Av/ Fulton St Exp, with  to Lefferts and  to Rockaways? Not even have  go 8 Av Exp with  to Lefferts or Rockaways via Fulton St Exp and  to Euclid via Fulton St Lcl?

 

I assume both in either proposal would have to exceed 26 TPH… I can see  15 TPH  15 TPH, a total of 30 TPH…

On 11/15/2023 at 2:53 PM, LGA Link N Train said:

As for Uptown, I'm assuming you want to swap the and  again? Once we get all 211's on the Property and Trains are extended to 10 Cars, sure no Problem but I'd Hold off until then. Also that last part I'm Crossing out entirely because I believe that Broadway Service should Have NO Business reverse branching onto CPW. 

Not quite,  would go to 205, absorbing the  ,  would become the current  uptown-wise. Regarding CPW-Broadway connection… well then if it can’t be done; can we add more  trains? Thus CPW would go as follows; 

 unchanged

 205 -CI: Concourse/CPW/6 Av Exp - Brighton Lcl

 BPB/168 - WTC: All local (24 TPH - 10 going to 168 14 to the Bronx)

 Discontinued

[FLX9304]

1 hour ago, MTA Researcher said:

In other words 50 St becomes an express stop?

 

So it wouldn’t be possible to run  together via 8 Av/ Fulton St Exp, with  to Lefferts and  to Rockaways? Not even have  go 8 Av Exp with  to Lefferts or Rockaways via Fulton St Exp and  to Euclid via Fulton St Lcl?

 

I assume both in either proposal would have to exceed 26 TPH… I can see  15 TPH  15 TPH, a total of 30 TPH…

Not quite,  would go to 205, absorbing the  ,  would become the current  uptown-wise. Regarding CPW-Broadway connection… well then if it can’t be done; can we add more  trains? Thus CPW would go as follows; 

 unchanged

 205 -CI: Concourse/CPW/6 Av Exp - Brighton Lcl

 BPB/168 - WTC: All local (24 TPH - 10 going to 168 14 to the Bronx)

 Discontinued

If you’re gonna discontinue the , what line are you’re gonna run on the 4th Ave line? That’s something you gotta think about. You can’t have 2 s operating from 2 different branches. You’re wasting money by doing that. 

[MTA Researcher]

7 minutes ago, FLX9304 said:

If you’re gonna discontinue the , what line are you’re gonna run on the 4th Ave line? That’s something you gotta think about. You can’t have 2 s operating from 2 different branches. You’re wasting money by doing that. 

 Astoria - CI:  Broadway/4 Av Exp via Sea Beach

 71 Av - 95 St:  QBL Lcl via 60th - Broadway/4 Av Exp stopping at 45 and 53 Sts via vanshookenragen’s  proposed switches.   would go via Manhattan Bridge.

 96 St/2 Av - CI: Broadway/4 Av Lcl via Montague St/West End 

In here Queens Bound trains go Broadway Express, 2 Av Trains via Broadway Local. This can be done via 57 St/7 Av Flip. Queens needs more Manhattan/Brooklyn Express service. That’s coming from one who dwells in Queens.

 71 Av - Brighton Beach: QBL Lcl via 63rd - 6 Av/Brighton Exp

 

If you haven’t noticed; 4 Av now has full coverage.

 

And please explain how am I wasting money having 2  trains branch out north? Doesn’t the  do that in Queens? Doesn’t the  do that in The Bronx ?

[MTA Rail Fan]

Here are some changes and deinterlines I've made around the current NYC Subway. It should be noted that not all of these are 100% firm, as I'm still tweaking a few things here and there and figuring out what might work and not work. All of which will be explained below.


 Van Cortlandt-242nd to South Ferry (All Times) - Broadway-7th Local
 Wakefield-241st to Flatbush Av (All Times) - WPR Local, Broadway-7th Express, Eastern Pkwy Local
 Harlem-148th to Flatbush Av (All Times Except Late Nights) - Broadway-7th Express, Eastern Pkwy Local (Late Night Shuttle to Times Sq-42nd)
 Woodlawn to New Lots Av (All Times) - Jerome Local, Lexington Av Express, Eastern Pkwy Express
 Eastchester-Dyre to Utica Av (All Times Except Late Nights) - WPR Local (Peak Express in Rush Hours), Lexington Av Local, Eastern Pkwy Express
 Pelham Bay Park to Brooklyn Bridge (All Times) - Lexington Av Local, Pelham Local (Pelham Peak Express via )
 Flushing-Main to 34th-Hudson (All Times) - Flushing Local (Flushing Peak Express via )
 Inwood-207th to Far Rockaway and Lefferts Blvd (All Times) - Washington Hts Express, CPW Local, 8th Av Express, Fulton St Express
 168th to Euclid Av (All Times Except Late Nights) - Washington Hts Local, CPW Local, 8th Av Express, Fulton St Local, via Liberty Av El to Lefferts Blvd
 World Trade Center to Jamaica Center (All Times) - 8th Av Local, via 53rd, Queens Blvd Express
 Bedford Park Blvd or 145th to Bay Ridge-95th (All Times Except Late Nights) - Concourse Local, CPW Express, 6th Av Express, 4th Av Express, Local after 36th St to Bay Ridge (Late Night Shuttle to 59th St-4th Av)
 Norwood-205th to Coney Island (All Times) - Concourse Local (Peak Express in Rush Hours), CPW Express, 6th Av Express, 4th Av Express, Sea Beach Local
 Jamaica-179th to Coney Island (All Times) - Hillside Av Local, Queens Blvd Express, via 53rd, 6th Av Local, Culver Express to Church Av
 Rockaway Park-116th to Metropolitan Av (All Times) - Rockaway Local, via RBB, Queens Blvd Local, via 63rd, 6th Av Local, via Jamaica Local
 Court Square to Church Av (All Times) - Crosstown Local, Culver Local
 Jamaica Center to Broad St (All Times) - Jamaica Local (Peak Express Skip-Stop in Rush Hours), Nassau St Local
 Jamaica Center to Broad St (Rush Hours) - Jamaica Local (Peak Express Skip-Stop in Rush Hours), Nassau St Local
 96th St-2nd Av to Coney Island (All Times) - 2nd Av, Broadway Express, Brighton Local
 96th St-2nd Av to Brighton Beach (Weekdays or All Times Except Late Nights) - 2nd Av, Broadway Express, Brighton Express
 Forest Hills-71st to 9th Av (Weekdays or All Times Except Late Nights) - Queens Blvd Local, Broadway Local, 4th Av Local 
 Astoria-Ditmars to Coney Island (All Times) - Astoria Local, Broadway Local, 4th Av Local, West End Local

As stated above, I will now explain the few changes and tweaks I've considered that aren't mentioned in this plan:
 - Initially, I considered routing the  to E 180th St alongside the and , but later contemplated redirecting it to Dyre Av, Nereid Av, or Wakefield. These considerations arose in the context of deinterlining the system and addressing bottlenecks at the 135th Junction and 149th-GC Junction. However, potential challenges with capacity limits and terminal procedures became apparent, especially if all three lines operated together via WPR. This would necessitate a decision between eliminating the via WPR or maintaining the current service configuration.    
 - If the were to be removed from WPR to alleviate the bottleneck at 149th, passengers would lose their one seat ride to Manhattan via Lexington Av. Reflecting on historical proposals, the 1968 Program for Action mentioned a new line along Park Avenue as a replacement for the 3rd Avenue El in the Bronx, possibly corresponding to the . It's uncertain if it would've continued along Park Avenue to Wakefield or make a connection with the via Gun Hill Rd to Nereid Avenue. Considering these aspects, one proposal involves resurrecting the Park Avenue Line concept, incorporating a lower-level station for seamless transfers between each line. Another thought could be rebuilding the tunnel to bypass 149th-GC, stopping at 149th-3rd and proceeding north via 3rd Avenue. The feasibility of merging either lines with the Dyre Avenue Line or WPR Line remains uncertain.   
 - In the initial introduction of the IND Second System Proposal, the Flushing Line featured two extensions beyond Main St — one leading to the College Point Line and the other to the Bayside Line. Today, large parts of Northeast Queens lack subway service, primarily relying on buses, rendering them transit deserts. In contemplating the revitalization of these proposals, I've considered extending the line exclusively via one of the branches. The challenge lies in deciding between College Point and Bayside, both being viable options. The objective is to select a single branch to avoid complexities related to merging points within the line and to enhance the overall capacity.
/ - I've proposed some slight changes for the line, considering options like extending it entirely to Far Rockaway or dividing service evenly between Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park, thereby eliminating the Rockaway Shuttle. To benefit both JFK and Rockaway riders and reduce travel time into Brooklyn, I suggest reinstating the Pitkin Avenue Extension from Euclid Avenue to Cross Bay Blvd, with tracks connecting to North Conduit Avenue, as shown in the IND Second System Proposal. Although it may seem minor, this modification eliminates the Rockaway Blvd merge, allowing trains to operate seamlessly into Lefferts Blvd. To provide riders on the Liberty Avenue Line access to the Rockaways, I'm proposing a transfer from Rockaway Blvd to the Rockaway Beach Branch, facilitated through the Liberty Avenue Station for the  to Rockaway Park-116th.  
 - A notable challenge along the Archer Avenue Line is Jamaica Center, originally not intended as a terminal. In reference to the 1968 Program for Action, the initial plan envisioned extending the upper level of the Archer Avenue Line onto the LIRR Atlantic Branch ROW, which is converted for subway use, stretching as far as Laurelton to provide subway service to Southeast Queens. This proposal should be implemented in order to provide the most capacity and service, forcing Far Rockaway and Long Beach LIRR trains to be redirected onto the Montauk/Babylon Branch. An additional suggestion involves constructing two more tracks along the ROW of that branch. This modification allows trains to bypass St. Albans while still providing service to the Rosedale station. The only adjustment I've made to this proposal is designating the terminal as Laurelton-225th instead of Springfield Blvd. It wouldn't be surprising that one of the challenges this proposal will encounter is opposition from NIMBYs (Not In My Backyard advocates).
// - I've reintroduced two major proposals, from the IND Second System and 1968 Program for Action, for these lines: the Hillside Avenue Extension and the Queens Super Express. The Hillside Avenue Extension envisions the extending its route to Queens Village-Springfield Blvd, effectively serving a substantial portion of Northeastern Queens along Hillside. Regarding the Queens Super Express, I've brought it back with some refinements. It will originate from 63rd Street, running parallel or via tunnels under the LIRR, making stops at Northern Blvd and Woodside-61st before merging into Queens Blvd through a new lower-level platform at Forest Hills. From there, it will operate under the current main center tracks, with additional tracks integrated into Jamaica Yard, bypassing Kew Gardens and emerging through a ramp into the Hillside Avenue Express tracks at 169th St. Even without the Hillside Avenue Extension, this design increases capacity within Queens Blvd, even allowing one of the local lines to operate fully to Jamaica-179th. This is where the  and lines come in, as I've reinstated the line from World Trade Center, operating alongside the via 53rd and Queens Blvd Express, where it will switch local after Forest Hills towards Jamaica-179th. Alternatively, the could assume the same role, operating to Jamaica-179th via Queens Blvd Local. However, I've occasionally reconsidered this due to the demand for Crosstown service into Queens Blvd. This proposal is still a work in progress, as I have yet to finalize what to do with the  (or ) and  lines. 
// - Today, the BMT Jamaica Line currently faces operational challenges between Marcy Avenue and Myrtle Avenue, impacting service and capacity. These issues involve merging delays during rush hours at Marcy Avenue between the / and lines, added by the slow curves and speed timers along the Williamsburg Bridge, including the Myrtle Avenue Junction. To address these concerns, I propose the reintroduction of the South 4th Street Line, as proposed from the IND Second System. In this plan, the  (or ) is rerouted back to 2nd Avenue, with the center tracks extending into Brooklyn via South 4th Street, as originally intended. New stops will be established at Clinton-Pitt Streets, Havemeyer Street, S 4th Street-Broadway, offering a transfer point with the , before turning via Beaver Street and making additional stops at Flushing Avenue and Myrtle Avenue-Bushwick Avenue. The line then turns via Myrtle Avenue, following the existing Myrtle El, placing identical stops until Fresh Pond, where it re-emerges onto the original tracks leading to the Metropolitan Avenue station. All stations along the line will accommodate 10 cars, with Metropolitan Avenue being rebuilt to accommodate this as well. The use of the  or  bullet will not matter in this proposal, with further provisions made for additional lines via South 4th Street, such as the 2nd Avenue Line or 8th Avenue Line, operating express to prevent any sort of reverse branching or merging issues along the line. 
/ - This is a small proposal, as it mainly entitles having either of these lines swap northern terminals or both to Astoria-Ditmars Blvd.
// - In my final proposal, I propose the reintroduction of the IND Second System's 2nd Avenue extension into the Bronx, via Lafayette Av, towards Throgs Neck. To ensure these three lines maintain their designated tracks without merging in on each other or reverse branching, I've reimagined the current 2nd Avenue Line. In this redesign, the and run express to 125th Street-2nd Avenue, with a transfer only at 72nd Street for the , operating as the 2nd Avenue Local. Recognizing the potential benefits of utilizing the Crosstown 125th Street Line and the extension into the Bronx, various options were considered. One involves the operating via 125th, with the express tracks splitting from 2 tracks into 4 tracks, allowing the  to operate on the local tracks of the Lafayette Avenue Line and the as the express. Another option includes having one Broadway Line via 125th, with the other Broadway Line operating via Lafayette Avenue as the express and the  operating as the Lafayette Avenue Local. The final, albeit far fetched, option is converting the Dyre Avenue Line into B Division and any one of these lines run up to Eastchester-Dyre, transforming E 180th St into the next Queensboro Plaza.

I recognize that these ideas and proposals may seem ambitious, perhaps even far fetched. They incorporate elements from historical plans like the 1939 IND Second System, the 1968 Program for Action, and other proposals made from various individuals, including Vanshnookenraggen. I am aware of the potential high costs associated with these plans, as based on current standards, and I understand that their realization may be unlikely. Nevertheless, it's enjoyable to explore and discuss these concepts, and I welcome opinions and thoughts from others on the matter. Please feel free to respond and share your perspectives. Thank you!

Edited November 19, 2023 by MTA Rail Fan

[Wallyhorse]

Some thoughts on this (replying to @MTARailFan's post that had a ton of emojis in it):

The only change on the IRT I would make would be on the , where north of 135 I would add a new elevated connection for the  that would close the existing 145 and 148-Lenox Terminal stations for a new, full-length elevated station at 145 running to 147 that covers most of the area Lenox Terminal goes to.  From there, I would have such go over a new bridge south of the Macombes Dam Bridge and running to a new station in the Bronx at 153-Yankees above the Metro North Station of the same name.  From there, the line would join the Jerome El south of 161-Yankee Stadium with likely a new upper level for that station before joining the line proper north of 161.  This  would run to Woodlawn with the (possibly with Woodlawn rebuilt as a three-track station to allow for more trains to terminate there) with some  service terminating at Burnside or Bedford Park Boulevard if not all trains can terminate at Woodlawn.

On the lettered/B Division lines, I would be looking to build an additional phase of the SAS where the operates via a new Schermerhorn Street tunnel to possibly first a new Schermerhorn Street station and a station at Seaport that would eventually be connected to the rest of the SAS before joining the Fulton Street line on the as-present unused tracks/platforms at Hoyt-Schermerhorn with the then becoming the Fulton Street local at all times to Euclid and extended late nights to Lefferts in place of the late-night shuttle currently in use on Lefferts.  This allows in Brooklyn the and  to both operate express and eliminate the merge/unmerge at Hoyt-Schermerhorn and another one at Euclid, allowing  the to operate to Lefferts except late nights and the  to fully operate in The Rockaways.  

The other significant change is the one I have noted many times:  Having Canal Street on the return to being the terminal station it once was with the intention of moving the  to Nassau and essentially having a split and  operate between 95th-Bay Ridge and Jamaica Center with the interchange between the two lines occurring southbound at Canal Street (where this  would terminate, something that was not possible until the current setup was done in 2004) and northbound at Chambers (where the / would terminate save for a handful of rush-hour  / trains that would end and begin at Broad Street.  This is mainly to improve  service in Brooklyn that in the past Bay Ridge politicians wanted split because too often the  had been the "rarely" in Brooklyn.  On Broadway, the  would replace the  to 71-Continental running 19/7 (with some  trains ending and beginning on the tunnel level of Canal Street) and a new "Yellow " operating from either 9th Street or Bay Parkway on the to Astoria on the Broadway/4th Avenue Local that would run at a max of 6 TPH and replace the  along Broadway and Trinity Place/Church Street in lower Manhattan via Montague.  These would be the only real changes I would make.  

[FLX9304]

15 hours ago, MTA Researcher said:

 Astoria - CI:  Broadway/4 Av Exp via Sea Beach

 71 Av - 95 St:  QBL Lcl via 60th - Broadway/4 Av Exp stopping at 45 and 53 Sts via vanshookenragen’s  proposed switches.   would go via Manhattan Bridge.

 96 St/2 Av - CI: Broadway/4 Av Lcl via Montague St/West End 

In here Queens Bound trains go Broadway Express, 2 Av Trains via Broadway Local. This can be done via 57 St/7 Av Flip. Queens needs more Manhattan/Brooklyn Express service. That’s coming from one who dwells in Queens.

 71 Av - Brighton Beach: QBL Lcl via 63rd - 6 Av/Brighton Exp

 

If you haven’t noticed; 4 Av now has full coverage.

 

And please explain how am I wasting money having 2  trains branch out north? Doesn’t the  do that in Queens? Doesn’t the  do that in The Bronx ?

The  is one way during peak hours for trains heading directly to the 239th St Yard. And there are only 5 trips up WPR. The  during the peak hour is more frequent than the . So that’s why they had that since the 1960s. 
 

the  is actually 2 train lines of old. The  was actually the Rockaways Line, and it still is. 
 

 

[MTA Researcher]

5 hours ago, FLX9304 said:

the  is actually 2 train lines of old.

If this is a thing; why not have 2  train lines?

[MTA Researcher]

17 hours ago, MTA Rail Fan said:

 Van Cortlandt-242nd to South Ferry (All Times) - Broadway-7th Local
 Wakefield-241st to Flatbush Av (All Times) - WPR Local, Broadway-7th Express, Eastern Pkwy Local
 Harlem-148th to Flatbush Av (All Times Except Late Nights) - Broadway-7th Express, Eastern Pkwy Local (Late Night Shuttle to Times Sq-42nd)

No problems here.

 

17 hours ago, MTA Rail Fan said:

 Woodlawn to New Lots Av (All Times) - Jerome Local, Lexington Av Express, Eastern Pkwy Express
 Eastchester-Dyre to Utica Av (All Times Except Late Nights) - WPR Local (Peak Express in Rush Hours), Lexington Av Local, Eastern Pkwy Express
 Pelham Bay Park to Brooklyn Bridge (All Times) - Lexington Av Local, Pelham Local (Pelham Peak Express via )

How would this work? The  merging with the  local going to 125 St is actually interlinking…

 

17 hours ago, MTA Rail Fan said:

 Flushing-Main to 34th-Hudson (All Times) - Flushing Local (Flushing Peak Express via )

No Problems Here

17 hours ago, MTA Rail Fan said:

 Inwood-207th to Far Rockaway and Lefferts Blvd (All Times) - Washington Hts Express, CPW Local, 8th Av Express, Fulton St Express
 168th to Euclid Av (All Times Except Late Nights) - Washington Hts Local, CPW Local, 8th Av Express, Fulton St Local, via Liberty Av El to Lefferts Blvd
 World Trade Center to Jamaica Center (All Times) - 8th Av Local, via 53rd, Queens Blvd Express
 Bedford Park Blvd or 145th to Bay Ridge-95th (All Times Except Late Nights) - Concourse Local, CPW Express, 6th Av Express, 4th Av Express, Local after 36th St to Bay Ridge (Late Night Shuttle to 59th St-4th Av)
 Norwood-205th to Coney Island (All Times) - Concourse Local (Peak Express in Rush Hours), CPW Express, 6th Av Express, 4th Av Express, Sea Beach Local
 Jamaica-179th to Coney Island (All Times) - Hillside Av Local, Queens Blvd Express, via 53rd, 6th Av Local, Culver Express to Church Av
 Rockaway Park-116th to Metropolitan Av (All Times) - Rockaway Local, via RBB, Queens Blvd Local, via 63rd, 6th Av Local, via Jamaica Local

 local in CPW , but express south of CPW? Impossible, as CPW express connects directly into 8 Av Express. You would be delaying   When the  crosses over to 59 st CC’s express tracks… The ideal way is to have  CPW/8 Av Exp  CPW Lcl/6 Av Exp with  running between 207 - Lefferts and  between 205 - Far Rockaway this allows  in nights to be a  shuttle to Lefferts and  be full time on all 4 boroughs going express in Manhattan and local in Bronx Brooklyn and Queens nights and weekdays peak-express Bronx, Express Manhattan and Brooklyn and weekends only express in manhattan and Brooklyn.

Thus  between 168 -  Bay Ridge and  BPB/145 - CI via CPW Lcl - 6 Av/4 Av Exp. Only downside is no more upper level 50 st unless we scrap this setting and do   as is  via QBL/8 Av Exp to Far Rock via Fulton St Exp.  BPB/168 - WTC,  absorbs  in Bronx and upper Manhattan.

 is fine

Not sure about the   though…

17 hours ago, MTA Rail Fan said:

 Jamaica Center to Broad St (All Times) - Jamaica Local (Peak Express Skip-Stop in Rush Hours), Nassau St Local
 Jamaica Center to Broad St (Rush Hours) - Jamaica Local (Peak Express Skip-Stop in Rush Hours), Nassau

 is useless.

17 hours ago, MTA Rail Fan said:

 96th St-2nd Av to Coney Island (All Times) - 2nd Av, Broadway Express, Brighton Local
 96th St-2nd Av to Brighton Beach (Weekdays or All Times Except Late Nights) - 2nd Av, Broadway Express, Brighton Express
 Forest Hills-71st to 9th Av (Weekdays or All Times Except Late Nights) - Queens Blvd Local, Broadway Local, 4th Av Local 
 Astoria-Ditmars to Coney Island (All Times) - Astoria Local, Broadway Local, 4th Av Local, West End Local

Who enjoys Broadway Express More? Queens or 2 Av? Show me proof.

[MTA Rail Fan]

Quote

How would this work? The merging with the  local going to 125 St is actually interlinking… 

Oops, I intended that as express, not local. I must've typed local by accident. I'll try to fix that if I can, unless it's too late.

3 hours ago, MTA Researcher said:

 local in CPW , but express south of CPW? Impossible, as CPW express connects directly into 8 Av Express. You would be delaying   When the  crosses over to 59 st CC’s express tracks… The ideal way is to have  CPW/8 Av Exp  CPW Lcl/6 Av Exp with  running between 207 - Lefferts and  between 205 - Far Rockaway this allows  in nights to be a  shuttle to Lefferts and  be full time on all 4 boroughs going express in Manhattan and local in Bronx Brooklyn and Queens nights and weekdays peak-express Bronx, Express Manhattan and Brooklyn and weekends only express in manhattan and Brooklyn.

Thus  between 168 -  Bay Ridge and  BPB/145 - CI via CPW Lcl - 6 Av/4 Av Exp. Only downside is no more upper level 50 st unless we scrap this setting and do   as is  via QBL/8 Av Exp to Far Rock via Fulton St Exp.  BPB/168 - WTC,  absorbs  in Bronx and upper Manhattan.

 is fine

Not sure about the   though…

To address concerns regarding the  and  lines, instead of demolishing the upper level at 50th Street and making the the only line there, I've absorbed the idea of converting 50th Street into an express stop. This involves shifting the platform over the local tracks, enabling all three lines to have a transfer point. The local track would be cut off, and a new switch added to merge onto the current express track, facilitating CPW Express service during weekend G.O without local service. This configuration allows the and to operate fully express along 8th Avenue, with the running exclusively on the local track. This creates space for another line, the , to be reintroduced for increased trains per hour (TPH). Another option, though cheaper, involves keeping the station as is but swapping the as the 8th Av express after 50th Street, merging onto incoming express traffic. Initially, I considered the into 168th Street and the back to Bedford Park Blvd, but this posed reverse branching challenges, making it more practical to retain the current arrangement and prevent potential merges.          

Regarding the , I support the decision for Rockaway Beach Branch reactivation by Queenslink. The question arose about its operational hours—whether it should run at all times or, as currently, with another service replacing it during weekends and late nights. Therefore, I've marked it as operational at all times. 

3 hours ago, MTA Researcher said:

Who enjoys Broadway Express More? Queens or 2 Av? Show me proof.

 

The objective isn't about personal preferences for the Broadway Express; rather, it's focused on eliminating the bottleneck created by the 34th-Herald merge on Broadway, causing delays. The optimal solution involved keeping the train on the express track to 96th-2nd, enabling more frequent runs for both lines without encountering merge issues. The subsequent decision revolved around whether to retain Broadway on Queens Blvd or extend both locals to Astoria. To align with the current NYC Subway while making a minor adjustment at 50th Street on 8th Avenue, the choice was made to maintain the and in their designated northern terminals.

[Caelestor]

Merges are okay because branches have lower frequencies than the trunks they're merging onto. Crossovers are not because you are blocking two parallel tracks are reducing overall capacity on both tracks. The most noticeable offenders are the  and the . On Broadway, send the  to 96 St and make the  a full time line (interline it with the  late nights). The  should stay on the express tracks, but the optimal configuration is for the  to run local on CPW and  to run express. For that, there needs to be a crossover installed between the local and express tracks south of 50 St.

[MTA Rail Fan]

On 11/19/2023 at 11:57 AM, Wallyhorse said:

The only change on the IRT I would make would be on the , where north of 135 I would add a new elevated connection for the  that would close the existing 145 and 148-Lenox Terminal stations for a new, full-length elevated station at 145 running to 147 that covers most of the area Lenox Terminal goes to.  From there, I would have such go over a new bridge south of the Macombes Dam Bridge and running to a new station in the Bronx at 153-Yankees above the Metro North Station of the same name.  From there, the line would join the Jerome El south of 161-Yankee Stadium with likely a new upper level for that station before joining the line proper north of 161.  This  would run to Woodlawn with the (possibly with Woodlawn rebuilt as a three-track station to allow for more trains to terminate there) with some  service terminating at Burnside or Bedford Park Boulevard if not all trains can terminate at Woodlawn.

I see the similarity to the original plan of having the tracks at 148th-Lenox connect with the 9th Av El, before merging onto the Jerome Line at 167th Street. I don't agree with this though, an upper level station on 161st-Yankees would not be ideal. The city doesn't want another elevated line built anywhere in the city, especially the lack of space within the area to allow it.

 

 

On 11/19/2023 at 11:57 AM, Wallyhorse said:

On the lettered/B Division lines, I would be looking to build an additional phase of the SAS where the operates via a new Schermerhorn Street tunnel to possibly first a new Schermerhorn Street station and a station at Seaport that would eventually be connected to the rest of the SAS before joining the Fulton Street line on the as-present unused tracks/platforms at Hoyt-Schermerhorn with the then becoming the Fulton Street local at all times to Euclid and extended late nights to Lefferts in place of the late-night shuttle currently in use on Lefferts.  This allows in Brooklyn the and  to both operate express and eliminate the merge/unmerge at Hoyt-Schermerhorn and another one at Euclid, allowing  the to operate to Lefferts except late nights and the  to fully operate in The Rockaways.

I agree on this, don't have much issues on it other than finding ways to eliminate the Rockaway Blvd merge.

On 11/19/2023 at 11:57 AM, Wallyhorse said:

The other significant change is the one I have noted many times:  Having Canal Street on the return to being the terminal station it once was with the intention of moving the  to Nassau and essentially having a split and  operate between 95th-Bay Ridge and Jamaica Center with the interchange between the two lines occurring southbound at Canal Street (where this  would terminate, something that was not possible until the current setup was done in 2004) and northbound at Chambers (where the / would terminate save for a handful of rush-hour  / trains that would end and begin at Broad Street.  This is mainly to improve  service in Brooklyn that in the past Bay Ridge politicians wanted split because too often the  had been the "rarely" in Brooklyn.  On Broadway, the  would replace the  to 71-Continental running 19/7 (with some  trains ending and beginning on the tunnel level of Canal Street) and a new "Yellow " operating from either 9th Street or Bay Parkway on the to Astoria on the Broadway/4th Avenue Local that would run at a max of 6 TPH and replace the  along Broadway and Trinity Place/Church Street in lower Manhattan via Montague.  These would be the only real changes I would make.

I would have to disagree on this motive.
1. There is no need to split the  into the  to Chambers. There's not a lot of demand for Nassau service below Broad Street along 4th Avenue. Not only that, the merge along Montague would strain capacity.
2. Instead of converting Canal Street on the Nassau Street Line into a terminal, have the old platforms be reused for service. You could definitely double capacity by using all 4 tracks along the  line, even making provisions to have the center tracks be used for some other line to terminate at Chambers Street. I don't know which line, but whatever is possible I guess. It would surely open up more transfer options.
3. The issue with the "Yellow " idea is that the 36th St Merge would be 2x more worse. It now functions as a merge for both Express trains and Local trains. That's a huge capacity limiter, especially with 6 TPH running. I don't see Bay Parkway as a suitable terminal at all. 9th Avenue however, can have its lower level reused for terminal usage.

[Vulturious]

This is probably the most tame thing I could be proposing, but I think it's within the realm of possibility that wouldn't require such a significant amount of work.

I'm proposing to reactivate the grayed out switches south of Dekalb Av. For those that aren't aware, this switch used to connect directly between the middle tracks bypassing Dekalb Av and the Brighton line. This is mainly for redundancy purposes, I'm not entirely sure how practical this is, but personally this would be rather beneficial for hopefully not much of a cost. 

This doesn't need to be answered, but if you were to agree, would you change the routing for South Brooklyn lines going through Dekalb and how?

[MTA Researcher]

1 hour ago, Vulturious said:

This is probably the most tame thing I could be proposing, but I think it's within the realm of possibility that wouldn't require such a significant amount of work.

I'm proposing to reactivate the grayed out switches south of Dekalb Av. For those that aren't aware, this switch used to connect directly between the middle tracks bypassing Dekalb Av and the Brighton line. This is mainly for redundancy purposes, I'm not entirely sure how practical this is, but personally this would be rather beneficial for hopefully not much of a cost. 

This doesn't need to be answered, but if you were to agree, would you change the routing for South Brooklyn lines going through Dekalb and how?

You know… I have been wondering; which line has direct access to 4 Av Express track wise, 6 Av or Broadway?

[Vulturious]

13 hours ago, MTA Researcher said:

You know… I have been wondering; which line has direct access to 4 Av Express track wise, 6 Av or Broadway?

Both, neither is more direct than the other, they both have just as much direct service to whichever track.

[Lawrence St]

Here's an idea:

Extend M track at Marcy Ave to continue onto the bridge tracks, and have express trains skip Marcy Ave. Marcy Ave tends to be a huge bottle neck with slow speeds and it would be better overall to have it skip.