Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[Armandito]

Oh, NOW I see what you're saying...So the express on the West End Line (including the ) is only during rush hours in the peak direction (Manhattan-bound in the morning rush and the other way around in the evening rush). I get it now.

 

There won't be any delays at Bay Parkway, as long as one train crosses one at a time and as long as it's scheduled properly.

If the ever comes back, which cars would most likely run on its route: R68/R68As or R160s?

[Armandito]

You want to remove the Bx12 SBS route lol?

No, I just want to complement it. The M15 SBS will eventually have the train as company.

[RollOver]

If the ever comes back, which cars would most likely run on its route: R68/R68As or R160s?

 

Either of both. It only ran 10 trainsets back in its 2004-2010 pattern.

[CenSin]

What about the relay at Bay Parkway? Since my proposal involves running the express along the West End Line rush hours in the peak direction, RollOver expressed doubts about the track layout at that station, since both Sixth Avenue and Broadway trains will have to cross each other so Broadway trains can be laid over on the express track and Sixth Avenue trains can continue to Coney Island on the local tracks. (BTW, Broadway service along the West End Line will operate bidirectional service during rush hours.)

Since the would end at Bay Parkway anyway, there should be little objection to holding the train so that a can pass in front of it. There are no passengers on the east of Bay Parkway, so nobody is on the train to experience the delay.

 

Going Manhattan-bound, trains can be scheduled to arrive at Bay Parkway at all the right times so that that never contend for a "timeshare" at Bay Parkway. Ideally, once a Manhattan-bound leaves the station on the local track, a can pull in right after and dwell in the station until it's scheduled to leave. During morning rush when trains pull into the express track, the can pretty much dwell there without getting in the way.

 

Going towards Bay Parkway outside of evening rush, and trains share tracks, so we'd have the same situation as when the ran to Bay Parkway.

 

Between 9 Avenue and 36 Street is where things become a little like Roger's Junction, except not as bad since the problem is spread out through a longer stretch of track. Your worst case scenarios are probably going to happen during rush hours when the runs express along West End.

 

Going Manhattan-bound during morning rush, you could have a and at 9 Avenue waiting on each other. And how they're sent out of the station must be coordinated with the approaching and trains as far away as 59 Street or 8 Avenue to reduce the delays. Ideally, the shows up at 36 Street with the . We can also eliminate any scheduled connection with the at 59 Street so that it arrives a little later with the instead. For this to work, trains must be scheduled so that it never catches up with a at 9 Avenue. Their scheduled connections must be at Bay Parkway or 62 Street.

 

Going southbound at 36 Street, there's not much that can be done short of common sense.

Edited February 1, 2015 by CenSin

[Armandito]

Until 1987, some rush hour trains went to the Chambers Street station. Why was this service discontinued?

[cl94]

Until 1987, some rush hour trains went to the Chambers Street station. Why was this service discontinued?

 

Unpopular. Heck, there wasn't enough usage to really justify the running to South Brooklyn, let alone the brown as well.

[Wallyhorse]

Until 1987, some rush hour trains went to the Chambers Street station. Why was this service discontinued?

The "Brown " trains as they were known in later years were "Bankers Specials" that dated back to when the Financial District really was that.  These were rush-hour only trains that operated in the peak direction, to Manhattan from 95th Street mornings and in the other ways late afternoons on weekdays and through I believe at least the early '60s also in the late mornings/early afternoons on Saturdays when the business week was actually five-and-a-half days and people actually went into work on Saturdays, usually until 11:00 AM, Noon or 1:00 PM I believe when it was a 44-hour workweek and not 40.

 

Ironically, the "Brown "  could work now as a weekends-only line because of the number of tourist attractions in lower Manhattan and the number of hotels there now are in Brooklyn (particularly downtown Brooklyn) with more going up.  More than likely if it were tried now, it would be the simply extended to Brooklyn to handle that.  If Coney Island gets built up like some think it will eventually, then it may be time to consider (at least during the summer) a weekends-only line from Essex Street-Coney Island via either the West End, Brighton or Sea Beach (perhaps a "Brown " train on weekends to Coney Island?)

[CenSin]

If Coney Island gets built up like some think it will eventually, then it may be time to consider (at least during the summer) a weekends-only line from Essex Street-Coney Island via either the West End, Brighton or Sea Beach (perhaps a "Brown " train on weekends to Coney Island?)

You kid us. They'd extend a first before they ever do anything with a Nassau Street-based route. For decades, the Nassau Street line has been neglected. The connection to DeKalb Avenue was always part-time, and the that went there has seen numerous revisions to its routing from Coney Island to Brighton Beach to 9 Avenue to Bay Parkway. A line with that much inconsistency ranks pretty low in terms of importance. An extension from there to Coney Island would be a service cut to us islanders since each line has exactly two tracks to turn trains. The most obvious thing I see happening is an increase in service and/or the since they run through the highly-popular Times Square and Chinatown as well. Those two places and Coney Island are always flooded with tourists. The might get a service boost anyway owing to 2 Avenue's needs.

[Wallyhorse]

I was simply making a point there that more was a reflection of how much lower Manhattan has changed from the days when it really was "The Financial District" to now where it's more residential with a number of tourist attractions (and also downtown Brooklyn).  I seriously doubt they'd actually do something on Nassau like I noted. 

[Javier]

I was simply making a point there that more was a reflection of how much lower Manhattan has changed from the days when it really was "The Financial District" to now where it's more residential with a number of tourist attractions (and also downtown Brooklyn).  I seriously doubt they'd actually do something on Nassau like I noted. 

Dont bother with him, I think your idea is great. A brown would be more suitable, but I would suggest bringing back the and have it run via your proposed line.

[Armandito]

Dont bother with him, I think your idea is great. A brown would be more suitable, but I would suggest bringing back the and have it run via your proposed line.

I would run the to Bay Parkway, not Coney Island. Edited February 3, 2015 by lara8710

[Lance]

Ironically, the "Brown "  could work now as a weekends-only line because of the number of tourist attractions in lower Manhattan and the number of hotels there now are in Brooklyn (particularly downtown Brooklyn) with more going up.  More than likely if it were tried now, it would be the simply extended to Brooklyn to handle that.  If Coney Island gets built up like some think it will eventually, then it may be time to consider (at least during the summer) a weekends-only line from Essex Street-Coney Island via either the West End, Brighton or Sea Beach (perhaps a "Brown " train on weekends to Coney Island?)

Thanks for recreating the TT line. Too bad riders will just prefer the D over it.

 

Dont bother with him, I think your idea is great. A brown would be more suitable, but I would suggest bringing back the and have it run via your proposed line.

I wouldn't dismiss his statement. Especially since he's right. When the M ran to Bay Parkway in the '90s and early 2000s, it was highly used as a replacement for the lost service on the Manhattan Bridge, more so when the north tracks of the bridge were closed and B and D service was cut back to Herald Square. When the bridge was fully reopened to rail traffic in '04, ridership on the M dropped like a rock and the service was cut back to rush hours only.

[bobtehpanda]

Proposal:

 

Upon opening of SAS Phase I, the Broadway Line will have a direct cross-platform transfer at Lex/63. This allows streamlining of Queens Blvd, Broadway, Eighth and Sixth Av services.

 

Broadway: All 60th St service goes to Astoria. QB passengers can transfer from the Broadway Line at Lex/63 using the .

 

Sixth Av Line: The and both travel via 63rd St.

 

Eighth Av Line: The swaps southern ends with the , and uses the Eighth Av Express tracks in Manhattan. A new service travels from WTC to Forest Hills via the Eighth Av Local and 53 St.

Edited February 6, 2015 by bobtehpanda

[Wallyhorse]

Thanks for recreating the TT line. Too bad riders will just prefer the D over it.

 

I wouldn't dismiss his statement. Especially since he's right. When the M ran to Bay Parkway in the '90s and early 2000s, it was highly used as a replacement for the lost service on the Manhattan Bridge, more so when the north tracks of the bridge were closed and B and D service was cut back to Herald Square. When the bridge was fully reopened to rail traffic in '04, ridership on the M dropped like a rock and the service was cut back to rush hours only.

That is true, riders would likely prefer the , however, this would really be more for tourists at hotels in lower Manhattan and Downtown Brooklyn (most of which the skips) looking for a direct ride to Coney Island on weekends during the summer if that does in fact becomes much more upscale in the years ahead (and obviously, I'm not talking now or in the next year or two)..

 

Like I said, the point was really to show the differences between 1987 (when the "Brown " ended) and now.   

Edited February 6, 2015 by Wallyhorse

[CenSin]

Proposal:

 

Upon opening of SAS Phase I, the Broadway Line will have a direct cross-platform transfer at Lex/63. This allows streamlining of Queens Blvd, Broadway, Eighth and Sixth Av services.

 

Broadway: All 60th St service goes to Astoria. QB passengers can transfer from the Broadway Line at Lex/63 using the .

 

Sixth Av Line: The and both travel via 63rd St.

 

Eighth Av Line: The swaps southern ends with the , and uses the Eighth Av Express tracks in Manhattan. A new service travels from WTC to Forest Hills via the Eighth Av Local and 53 St.

This is the most logical weird idea yet. From the perspective of efficiency, this makes sense, but it would appear that you gave the two lines with the second crappiest frequencies to Queens Boulevard (). Calculating the frequency of the based on the World Trade Center's current capacity usage gives 8 trains per hour which is less than the (10 trains per hour) but the same as the ; you get that much out of the terminating at World Trade Center by virtue of the fact that the runs at a piss-poor 6~7 trains per hour frequency.

[Javier]

Proposal:

 

Upon Completion of Phase 3 of the SAS, I would recommended the following:

 

train runs full time between 125 Street and Houston Street and select "express" trains runs via the from Brighton Beach to Forest Hills 71 Ave.

 

If that is not acceptable:

 

is brought back and runs between Brighton Beach and Forest Hills 71 Ave using the connection to the BMT line.

[CenSin]

Proposal:

 

Upon Completion of Phase 3 of the SAS, I would recommended the following:

 

train runs full time between 125 Street and Houston Street and select "express" trains runs via the from Brighton Beach to Forest Hills 71 Ave.

 

If that is not acceptable:

 

is brought back and runs between Brighton Beach and Forest Hills 71 Ave using the connection to the BMT line.

What do you want to do about:

• the and between Parkside Avenue and DeKalb Avenue?
• the and between DeKalb Avenue and Prince Street?
• the and between 36 Street and Forest Hills–71 Avenue?

On each of those segments described, there are two pre-existing routes with a combined frequency of no less than 16.

 

Case study:

• the was eliminated from Queens Boulevard when the started running in 2001 to keep the local tracks from being too crowded. Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/25/nyregion/panel-approves-new-v-train-but-shortens-g-line-to-make-room.html

[bobtehpanda]

This is the most logical weird idea yet. From the perspective of efficiency, this makes sense, but it would appear that you gave the two lines with the second crappiest frequencies to Queens Boulevard ( ). Calculating the frequency of the based on the World Trade Center's current capacity usage gives 8 trains per hour which is less than the (10 trains per hour) but the same as the ; you get that much out of the terminating at World Trade Center by virtue of the fact that the runs at a piss-poor 6~7 trains per hour frequency.

 

I don't know enough about QB local to know if the local needs the 2TPH it will be losing. I projected this assuming that the and maintain 15 TPH, but most likely the addition of Eighth Av service on the local will reduce loads on the express, while at the same time the loss of service will increase loads on the trains going into 63rd St.

[CenSin]

I don't know enough about QB local to know if the local needs the 2TPH it will be losing. I projected this assuming that the and maintain 15 TPH, but most likely the addition of Eighth Av service on the local will reduce loads on the express, while at the same time the loss of service will increase loads on the trains going into 63rd St.

I feel that the has a bit more going for it than just the extra 2 trains per hour. It's the sole Broadway line to run through Queens Boulevard, and as Broadway runs across midtown, Times Square, Herald Square, Union Square, Chinatown, and the financial district, the commands a lot of support. Both the 6 Avenue and 8 Avenue lines miss a lot of these areas (sometimes not by much, but enough to make a difference).

 

Under your scenario, I'd agree that the loads to 63 Street would increase since both 53 Street and 8 Avenue have such poor transfer options for Broadway passengers, but those looking for local stations along Broadway would have to take one of those inconvenient transfers at 42 Street–Port Authority Bus Terminal or 34 Street–Herald Square; either that, or they'd have to make 2 transfers →→.

 

The more I think about it, the more I feel that the loss of the would be too much for operational efficiency. That efficiency would not benefit passengers who now have to waste time on transfer passageways and multiple transfers.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

The is also the only Queens Blvd service to offer direct transfers to the Lexington Ave and express trains. If the is taken off QB and replaced with another 8th Ave service, (the ), then all QBL riders who want the Lexington Ave express (which is not an insignificant number), will have to make two transfers. The , and trains do not have direct transfers to the and . Neither would this service. I doubt very many people would take the to the deep Lexington/63rd St station, then walk the four blocks south to catch the 4 or 5 at 59th, especially with the sidewalks as icy as they are now. Or in the pouring rain or during a heat wave. At least now, if you're willing to trade a few extra minutes on a local in Queens, you can get to the Lexington Ave express in just one transfer if you take the . Losing the on QBL would be a big loss.

Edited February 7, 2015 by T to Dyre Avenue

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Proposal:

 

Upon opening of SAS Phase I, the Broadway Line will have a direct cross-platform transfer at Lex/63. This allows streamlining of Queens Blvd, Broadway, Eighth and Sixth Av services.

 

Broadway: All 60th St service goes to Astoria. QB passengers can transfer from the Broadway Line at Lex/63 using the .

 

Sixth Av Line: The and both travel via 63rd St.

 

Eighth Av Line: The swaps southern ends with the , and uses the Eighth Av Express tracks in Manhattan. A new service travels from WTC to Forest Hills via the Eighth Av Local and 53 St.

Can't the and lines coexist on Queens Blvd? Especially if the were to be rerouted to the 63rd St Tunnel?

[RollOver]

Exactly. These are partly one of the reasons why the is always more crowded than the , because all of the stations on the IND Archer Avenue and 53rd Street corridors (including Port Authority Bus Terminal and Penn Station) served by the have higher ridership than the ones served on the .

 

Of course, the and roughly have the same frequencies, though.

[Q43LTD]

I just can't imagine Astoria handling 3 services or World Trade handling 2 services

[bobtehpanda]

Can't the and lines coexist on Queens Blvd? Especially if the were to be rerouted to the 63rd St Tunnel?

 

 

I just can't imagine Astoria handling 3 services or World Trade handling 2 services

 

The plan would eliminate the entirely for two reasons: 1, the 60th St tunnel is one of the worst bottlenecks in the system, and 2, demand for Astoria is going to increase. Under this plan, Broadway will only have three services; express service on the to 96 St, and locals to Ditmars (with the cut back on weekends to 57 St), eliminating the need for the to be brought back.

 

This is only if Astoria gets really overcrowded and Fulton service needs to increase. Total TPH on Queens Blvd would not change by very much.

[Javier]

What I want ot know is why the cant be extened to Ozone Park while the runs to Far Rockaway at all times?