bobtehpanda Posted April 9, 2018 Share #6326 Posted April 9, 2018 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. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T to Dyre Avenue Posted April 9, 2018 Share #6327 Posted April 9, 2018 (edited) 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 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coney Island Av Posted April 9, 2018 Share #6328 Posted April 9, 2018 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. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted April 9, 2018 Share #6329 Posted April 9, 2018 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. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T to Dyre Avenue Posted April 9, 2018 Share #6330 Posted April 9, 2018 (edited) 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 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R68OnBroadway Posted April 10, 2018 Share #6331 Posted April 10, 2018 (edited) 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 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGA Link N Train Posted April 10, 2018 Share #6332 Posted April 10, 2018 (edited) 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 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coney Island Av Posted April 10, 2018 Share #6333 Posted April 10, 2018 (edited) 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 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R68OnBroadway Posted April 10, 2018 Share #6334 Posted April 10, 2018 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). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jchambers2120 Posted April 10, 2018 Share #6335 Posted April 10, 2018 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. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R68OnBroadway Posted April 10, 2018 Share #6336 Posted April 10, 2018 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... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T to Dyre Avenue Posted April 10, 2018 Share #6337 Posted April 10, 2018 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. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R68OnBroadway Posted April 10, 2018 Share #6338 Posted April 10, 2018 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? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted April 10, 2018 Share #6339 Posted April 10, 2018 (edited) 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 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted April 10, 2018 Share #6340 Posted April 10, 2018 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. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T to Dyre Avenue Posted April 10, 2018 Share #6341 Posted April 10, 2018 (edited) 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 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallyhorse Posted April 12, 2018 Share #6342 Posted April 12, 2018 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. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KK 6 Ave Local Posted April 14, 2018 Share #6343 Posted April 14, 2018 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. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CenSin Posted April 14, 2018 Share #6344 Posted April 14, 2018 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. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KK 6 Ave Local Posted April 14, 2018 Share #6345 Posted April 14, 2018 9 hours ago, CenSin said: Alright… time to go play with your firetruck and choo choo. no thank u 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallyhorse Posted April 15, 2018 Share #6346 Posted April 15, 2018 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. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulrivera Posted April 16, 2018 Share #6347 Posted April 16, 2018 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. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted April 16, 2018 Share #6348 Posted April 16, 2018 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. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CenSin Posted April 16, 2018 Share #6349 Posted April 16, 2018 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 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallyhorse Posted April 16, 2018 Share #6350 Posted April 16, 2018 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). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.