Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[bobtehpanda]

2 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

It should go all the way into the airport. Why stop it just outside the airport?

You can serve East Elmhurst or LGA but not both. Given a choice I would rather serve northern Elmhurst. LGA is big enough to warrant a people-mover system for itself anyways.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Right, you can’t serve both, not if you’re extending the  and  from Astoria. But my point was why stop outside right the airport at 81st Street and 21st Avenue, like @LGA Link N train proposed? Might as well continue, either into the airport or south of it into East Elmhurst. Although extending the  from Ditmars would require bit of a roundabout way of getting to East Elmhurst.

Edited April 9, 2018 by T to Dyre Avenue

[Coney Island Av]

It's supposed to be called the @LGA Link N train for a reason....

This extension would be pointless if it doesn't serve the airport. It's like saying to tourists "your subway line is right outside the airport, but you're still a step farther!" Yes, it would provide access to underserved neighborhoods, but just because we're stuck with Cuomo's stupid AirTrain doesn't mean we should cut it from going to the airport entirely. 

Instead, despite the expense, extend the  via my fully proposed Northern Blvd line to Flushing/College Point. This way, you could have the  take care of East Elmhurst, and the  to LGA. You'd be pissing off NIMBYs for a less-supported proposal instead of bringing it to the airport. 

[RR503]

Look, the current JFK airtrain is built to B division standards, so one can probably expect the same for the idiot airtrain to LGA. Just capture it, and extend the  to Willets Pt or all the way to Jamaica. Sure, it misses most neighborhoods, but it's the best thinkable use for such a doltish project. 

[T to Dyre Avenue]

On 4/8/2018 at 3:47 PM, LGA Link N train said:

new proposal for yall!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Extending the and to 81st Street. First, it'll turn on 20 Avenue to the east with one or two stub tracks leading to a New Yard, partially on ConEd land. after it turns on 20 Avenue, the only intermediate stop is Steinway Street where it continues on 20 Av until it reaches 21 Avenue and Terminates at 81 Street where the AirTrain LGA should be extended (since we're stuck with it) 

But are we really stuck with it? LGA AirTrain isn’t a done deal just yet.

34 minutes ago, RR503 said:

Look, the current JFK airtrain is built to B division standards, so one can probably expect the same for the idiot airtrain to LGA. Just capture it, and extend the  to Willets Pt or all the way to Jamaica. Sure, it misses most neighborhoods, but it's the best thinkable use for such a doltish project. 

I’d be fine with the  (or a beefed-up  if they eliminate the  switching from local to express at 34th St) going to a little further than Willets Point to Flushing. Would provide some much needed relief for the , that’s for sure.

Edited April 9, 2018 by T to Dyre Avenue

[R68OnBroadway]

We all know Rodgers Junction must be rebuilt, but what plan would be best to rebuild it?  It is a no-brainer to connect the Nostrand Av line with the  local tracks to avoid that awful merge with the  , but you can save a great deal of time and money if you just deinterline the branches and have the Lex lines run down New Lots (  to Utica via express,  via local to New Lots) and have the Bway-7th Av lines run to Flatbush, since you only need to connect Eastern Pkwy SB local to the SB Nostrand track. 

I don't know much about the demographics for ridership and destinations about the area, but would it make more sense to deinterline to build only one small connection or would it just be better to build the  flyovers?

Edited April 10, 2018 by R68OnBroadway

[LGA Link N Train]

36 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said:

We all know Rodgers Junction must be rebuilt, but what plan would be best to rebuild it?  It is a no-brainer to connect the Nostrand Av line with the  local tracks to avoid that awful merge with the  , but you can save a great deal of time and money if you just deinterline the branches and have the Lex lines run down New Lots (  to Utica via express,  via local to New Lots) and have the Bway-7th Av lines run to Flatbush, since you only need to connect Eastern Pkwy SB local to the SB Nostrand track. 

I don't know much about the demographics for ridership and destinations about the area, but would it make more sense to deinterline to build only one small connection or would it just be better to build the  flyovers?

http://www.vanshnookenraggen.com/_index/2018/03/the-future-of-the-utica-ave-subway/

 

I feel too lazy to explain myself and I have homework to finish, so I hope this article answers your question+

Edited April 10, 2018 by LGA Link N train

[Coney Island Av]

52 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said:

We all know Rodgers Junction must be rebuilt, but what plan would be best to rebuild it?  It is a no-brainer to connect the Nostrand Av line with the  local tracks to avoid that awful merge with the  , but you can save a great deal of time and money if you just deinterline the branches and have the Lex lines run down New Lots (  to Utica via express,  via local to New Lots) and have the Bway-7th Av lines run to Flatbush, since you only need to connect Eastern Pkwy SB local to the SB Nostrand track. 

I don't know much about the demographics for ridership and destinations about the area, but would it make more sense to deinterline to build only one small connection or would it just be better to build the  flyovers?

I think there won't be time savings for deinterlining, because Nevins St and Franklin Av will become overcrowded with riders trying to get to either side of Manhattan. 

There would be time savings for deinterlining, however platform congestion is too strict, and will completely negate the time savings deinterlining would've had. In fact, it will either just take the same amount of time to get to Manhattan, or it will be a lot longer. You cannot increase TPH either because terminal capacity is limited. If you were a daily commuter off of the Nostrand Av line and worked on the East Side, would you rather be delayed on a train but in a no-stress situation, or be in a hectic situation in which riders cram onto the trains, causing platform congestion? 

The only problem I see with rebuilding Rogers is the cost. However, will the cost be worth it despite the expense? I say we rebuild Rogers because it allows additional capacity for the Nostrand Av line to be extended, as well as a new Utica Av line off the IRT. This not only allows for TPH on the  to be increased, but also allows additional expansion into underserved neighborhoods. Simply deinterlining the branches won't allow additional expansions off of the Brooklyn IRT, and saves little to no time given the platform congestion.

The same case goes with the 149 St Junction. 

EDIT: @R68OnBroadway oh yeah. The time for rebuilding the junction would take probably years to complete. 

If so service should look like this if the flyovers are rebuilt. 

: Wakefield-241 St to Wall St

: Harlem-148 St to Wall St (some rush hour train terminate at Times Square-42 St)

: Woodlawn to Atlantic Av-Barclays Center

: Dyre/Nereid Av to Atlantic Av-Barclays Center (Bowling Green weekends)

A transfer to the  at Junius St should be established, and a shuttle train will run from Utica to New Lots. 

Edited April 10, 2018 by Coney Island Av

[R68OnBroadway]

Just now, Coney Island Av said:

I think there won't be time savings, because Nevins St and Franklin Av will become overcrowded with riders trying to get to either side of Manhattan. 

There would be time savings for deinterlining, however platform congestion is too strict, and will completely negate the time savings deinterlining would've had. In fact, it will either just take the same amount of time to get to Manhattan, or it will be a lot longer. You cannot increase TPH either because terminal capacity is limited. If you were a daily commuter off of the Nostrand Av line and worked on the East Side, would you rather be delayed on a train but in a no-stress situation, or be in a hectic situation in which riders cram onto the trains, causing platform congestion? 

The only problem I see with rebuilding Rogers is the cost. However, will the cost be worth it despite the expense? I say we rebuild Rogers because it allows additional capacity for the Nostrand Av line to be extended, as well as a new Utica Av line off the IRT. This not only allows for TPH on the  to be increased, but also allows additional expansion into underserved neighborhoods. Simply deinterlining the branches won't allow additional expansions off of the Brooklyn IRT, and saves little to no time given the platform congestion.

The same case goes with the 149 St Junction. 

By time I meant that there would be less disruption to the Eastern Pkwy line (construction time, not travel time).

[Jchambers2120]

In regards to Rogers this thread should answer your questions.  And your proposal of all Lex service to Utica/ New Lots while 7av service to Flatbush is actually brought up in some MTA documents. 

 

[R68OnBroadway]

1 hour ago, Jchambers2120 said:

In regards to Rogers this thread should answer your questions.  And your proposal of all Lex service to Utica/ New Lots while 7av service to Flatbush is actually brought up in some MTA documents. 

 

Looks like it would be best to just build that short segment and deinterline the branches... building flyovers for the  will take too long and disrupt too many...

 

[T to Dyre Avenue]

2 hours ago, Coney Island Av said:

I think there won't be time savings for deinterlining, because Nevins St and Franklin Av will become overcrowded with riders trying to get to either side of Manhattan. 

...

EDIT: @R68OnBroadway oh yeah. The time for rebuilding the junction would take probably years to complete. 

If so service should look like this if the flyovers are rebuilt. 

: Wakefield-241 St to Wall St

: Harlem-148 St to Wall St (some rush hour train terminate at Times Square-42 St)

: Woodlawn to Atlantic Av-Barclays Center

: Dyre/Nereid Av to Atlantic Av-Barclays Center (Bowling Green weekends)

A transfer to the  at Junius St should be established, and a shuttle train will run from Utica to New Lots. 

You’d never be able to run this kind of service pattern while rebuilding Rogers. Too many people would be displaced onto other lines. It would be far worse than the upcoming  shutdown. Especially if it’s a “years-long” project.

Better to just de-interline Rogers. Send  to Flatbush,  to New Lots (late nights shuttle between New Lots and Atlantic) and extend  to Kings Plaza via Utica. 

[R68OnBroadway]

11 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

You’d never be able to run this kind of service pattern while rebuilding Rogers. Too many people would be displaced onto other lines. It would be far worse than the upcoming  shutdown. Especially if it’s a “years-long” project.

Better to just de-interline Rogers. Send  to Flatbush,  to New Lots (late nights shuttle between New Lots and Atlantic) and extend  to Kings Plaza via Utica. 

Your plan includes building that pocket track from the SB local to the SB Nostrand track, right?

[RR503]

11 hours ago, Coney Island Av said:

I think there won't be time savings for deinterlining, because Nevins St and Franklin Av will become overcrowded with riders trying to get to either side of Manhattan. 

There would be time savings for deinterlining, however platform congestion is too strict, and will completely negate the time savings deinterlining would've had. In fact, it will either just take the same amount of time to get to Manhattan, or it will be a lot longer. You cannot increase TPH either because terminal capacity is limited. If you were a daily commuter off of the Nostrand Av line and worked on the East Side, would you rather be delayed on a train but in a no-stress situation, or be in a hectic situation in which riders cram onto the trains, causing platform congestion? 

The only problem I see with rebuilding Rogers is the cost. However, will the cost be worth it despite the expense? I say we rebuild Rogers because it allows additional capacity for the Nostrand Av line to be extended, as well as a new Utica Av line off the IRT. This not only allows for TPH on the  to be increased, but also allows additional expansion into underserved neighborhoods. Simply deinterlining the branches won't allow additional expansions off of the Brooklyn IRT, and saves little to no time given the platform congestion.

The same case goes with the 149 St Junction. 

EDIT: @R68OnBroadway oh yeah. The time for rebuilding the junction would take probably years to complete. 

If so service should look like this if the flyovers are rebuilt. 

: Wakefield-241 St to Wall St

: Harlem-148 St to Wall St (some rush hour train terminate at Times Square-42 St)

: Woodlawn to Atlantic Av-Barclays Center

: Dyre/Nereid Av to Atlantic Av-Barclays Center (Bowling Green weekends)

A transfer to the  at Junius St should be established, and a shuttle train will run from Utica to New Lots. 

You are VASTLY overestimating the effect transfers will have on this. Yes, people may have to change trains at Nevins/Franklin, but unless literally everyone is doing so, then you’ll just get the sort of crowding one sees at say Queens Plaza.

Stated differently, Rogers regularly delays train for upwards of a minute. You’d need a situation worse than GCT to accomplish the same on EPW — impossible, given the fact that there are literally not enough riders on EPW to make up such big crowds. 

If you simply add a switch and pocket track as per the plan posted above, you get all the capacity you’d ever need for a Nostrand extension and a Utica line. That said, the deinterlining is necessary to affect the capacity increase, as unless you want to spend a decade or more playing sandbox under Eastern Parkway, the only way to rationalize Rogers is to send trains on the southern (local) tracks on its southern (Nostrand) branch. 

Edited April 10, 2018 by RR503

[Lance]

To add on, if service was increased on the Brooklyn lines as part of the deinterlining process, it would offset the time spent transferring between trains. The service restrictions currently in place are because of Rogers Junction, not in spite of it.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

14 hours ago, R68OnBroadway said:

Your plan includes building that pocket track from the SB local to the SB Nostrand track, right?

Pocket track? My plan would certainly include a new straight track from Franklin Avenue to Rogers Junction, so that the  and  don’t merge with the , which would now be serving the Nostrand and Kingston Ave stations full time and would switch over to the local tracks immediately after leaving Franklin. That’s key to eliminating the delays the current  merge causes. I thought a pocket track was a middle track used to short-turn trains, like at Whitehall St for the  or the middle track between 42nd and 34th used to relay the late night .

Edited April 10, 2018 by T to Dyre Avenue

[Wallyhorse]

On 4/9/2018 at 9:19 PM, Coney Island Av said:

I think there won't be time savings for deinterlining, because Nevins St and Franklin Av will become overcrowded with riders trying to get to either side of Manhattan. 

There would be time savings for deinterlining, however platform congestion is too strict, and will completely negate the time savings deinterlining would've had. In fact, it will either just take the same amount of time to get to Manhattan, or it will be a lot longer. You cannot increase TPH either because terminal capacity is limited. If you were a daily commuter off of the Nostrand Av line and worked on the East Side, would you rather be delayed on a train but in a no-stress situation, or be in a hectic situation in which riders cram onto the trains, causing platform congestion? 

The only problem I see with rebuilding Rogers is the cost. However, will the cost be worth it despite the expense? I say we rebuild Rogers because it allows additional capacity for the Nostrand Av line to be extended, as well as a new Utica Av line off the IRT. This not only allows for TPH on the  to be increased, but also allows additional expansion into underserved neighborhoods. Simply deinterlining the branches won't allow additional expansions off of the Brooklyn IRT, and saves little to no time given the platform congestion.

The same case goes with the 149 St Junction. 

EDIT: @R68OnBroadway oh yeah. The time for rebuilding the junction would take probably years to complete. 

If so service should look like this if the flyovers are rebuilt. 

: Wakefield-241 St to Wall St

: Harlem-148 St to Wall St (some rush hour train terminate at Times Square-42 St)

: Woodlawn to Atlantic Av-Barclays Center

: Dyre/Nereid Av to Atlantic Av-Barclays Center (Bowling Green weekends)

A transfer to the  at Junius St should be established, and a shuttle train will run from Utica to New Lots. 

Actually, the and  could go to Franklin Avenue because there are switches already in place near Eastern Parkway.  You might need to put in more switches west of Franklin Avenue to pull this off.

What would have to be done first before Rogers Avenue could be rebuilt would be to do ANOTHER rebuild of the Franklin Avenue Shuttle Line, this time back to full-length stations on the line AND two tracks north of Botanic Garden, preferably with it connected to another trunk line if possible.  Until THAT is done, it makes rebuilding Rogers Junction likely can't be done without a major disruption to service.  

[KK 6 Ave Local]

Here's my proposal:  train, starts at Inwood 207, goes down with the  until 125 st, goes onto Second Av, then in lower manhattan goes thru a new tunnel (was originally proposing cranberry but that isn't gonna work lol), meets up with  at High street, goes with  as an express, then splits off after Bway Junction and goes on the LIRR until Queens Village and ends there. 

[CenSin]

16 minutes ago, thicctrain said:

Here's my proposal:  train, starts at Inwood 207, goes down with the  until 125 st, goes onto Second Av, then in lower manhattan goes thru a new tunnel (was originally proposing cranberry but that isn't gonna work lol), meets up with  at High street, goes with  as an express, then splits off after Bway Junction and goes on the LIRR until Queens Village and ends there. 

Alright… time to go play with your firetruck and choo choo.

[KK 6 Ave Local]

9 hours ago, CenSin said:

Alright… time to go play with your firetruck and choo choo.

no thank u

[Wallyhorse]

On 4/13/2018 at 10:15 PM, thicctrain said:

Here's my proposal:  train, starts at Inwood 207, goes down with the  until 125 st, goes onto Second Av, then in lower manhattan goes thru a new tunnel (was originally proposing cranberry but that isn't gonna work lol), meets up with  at High street, goes with  as an express, then splits off after Bway Junction and goes on the LIRR until Queens Village and ends there. 

My response to this is in the Second Avenue Discussion Thread.

[paulrivera]

I thought of something for late night service:

Run some lines every 30 minutes overnight, but expand some of the supplementary lines to run 24/7 to maintain 10 minute combined headways on the trunk lines.

: run as-is; : 148 St-New Lots Av

: Woodlawn-Utica Avenue; : Dyre Av-Atlantic Av (no Dyre shuttle);  runs as-is

: exempt, continues to run 20 minutes overnight.

: run as-is; : 168 St-Lefferts Blvd (replaces the Euclid-Lefferts shuttle overnight)

: Columbus Circle-Brighton Beach; : runs as-is; : Essex St or Chambers St-Metropolitan Av on 20 minute headways (4 cars)

: exempt, each continue to run 20 minutes overnight

: run as is; : 71 Av Queens-95 St Brooklyn.

[RR503]

What does this do for the trunks? They already have relatively frequent service, so I fail to see how cutting branch service to maintain the status quo is at all helpful.

I also think that in general, we need to stop focusing on the trunks for off peak service. Yes, they largely have local service, and yes, that's where ridership density is highest, but adding express service to those areas while cutting branches ignores the reality that at weird times of night especially, people aren't travelling within the core, but instead to/from homes in outlying areas. They aren't running errands or attending meetings; no one is up and on the subway at 3 AM unless they absolutely have to. They are on the subway largely because their job requires them to be, or they're heading home from something. 

[CenSin]

48 minutes ago, RR503 said:

at weird times of night especially, people aren't travelling within the core, but instead to/from homes in outlying areas. They aren't running errands or attending meetings; no one is up and on the subway at 3 AM unless they absolutely have to. They are on the subway largely because their job requires them to be, or they're heading home from something. 

Bar hopping and partying

[Wallyhorse]

1 hour ago, RR503 said:

What does this do for the trunks? They already have relatively frequent service, so I fail to see how cutting branch service to maintain the status quo is at all helpful.

I also think that in general, we need to stop focusing on the trunks for off peak service. Yes, they largely have local service, and yes, that's where ridership density is highest, but adding express service to those areas while cutting branches ignores the reality that at weird times of night especially, people aren't travelling within the core, but instead to/from homes in outlying areas. They aren't running errands or attending meetings; no one is up and on the subway at 3 AM unless they absolutely have to. They are on the subway largely because their job requires them to be, or they're heading home from something. 

And this is why that would not work.  What I would do is have more lines run extended service during the overnight, mostly as locals that serve more frequently traveled stops.  As I would be looking to do it:
 

and run as-is, runs 148th Street-South Ferry station on the  (all lines run local during a 20-minute stretch where there is a 6-7 minute gap on the trunk line).

 and run as-is,  runs with the  to Brooklyn Bridge (set up in the same manner as the west side)

 and  run as-is, runs 168th Street-Lefferts Boulevard (eliminating the late-night Lefferts shuttle) 

  and  remain as they are.

 runs Metropolitan Avenue to 96th Street-2nd Avenue (this also would be on weekends and holidays)

 runs full route (95th Street to 71st-Continental).