Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[MTA Dude]

I didn't think the and are at maximum capacity. I doubt this would work, but what if the ran less frequently weekdays since we could use the and for the stations used by the ? 

 

Yeah. Wouldn't work. Best eliminating all other trash.

[Javier]

Okay don't use (P) use (O)

[bobtehpanda]

I didn't think the and are at maximum capacity. I doubt this would work, but what if the ran less frequently weekdays since we could use the and for the stations used by the ? 

 

The is actually more crowded than the , and the only reason there are rush hour (E)s to 179th is that Jamaica Center cannot actually handle all of them (it has 12 TPH capacity).

 

Basically, extension in Eastern Queens is not going to happen until we build the Queens Blvd Bypass, which IMO would've been much better than building the Interconnector (and was only forecast to cost three times as much).

 

Okay don't use (P) use (O)

 

You can use (P), , (U), and (Y) even though the last two will end up sounding really stupid in real conversation.

 

(O) and (I) are off limits due to their similarity to zero and one.

[Lance]

I didn't think the and are at maximum capacity. I doubt this would work, but what if the ran less frequently weekdays since we could use the and for the stations used by the ? 

First off, why take the F off 63rd Street? Even with your new Y line, 63rd Street has plenty of room for the F as well. Switching between 53rd and 63rd Streets at different times is just confusing for no reason.

 

Secondly, Bob is right. The Queens Blvd tracks are at capacity with 15 E trains and 15 F's at the height of the rush. Adding another line would be too much for the line. Not unless you cut some service on the E and/or F. Jamaica Center is another problem. Unless that station is reconfigured, those V trains won't be able to run to Parsons/Archer. Not in tandem with the E.

[Union Tpke]

First off, why take the F off 63rd Street? Even with your new Y line, 63rd Street has plenty of room for the F as well. Switching between 53rd and 63rd Streets at different times is just confusing for no reason.

 

Secondly, Bob is right. The Queens Blvd tracks are at capacity with 15 E trains and 15 F's at the height of the rush. Adding another line would be too much for the line. Not unless you cut some service on the E and/or F. Jamaica Center is another problem. Unless that station is reconfigured, those V trains won't be able to run to Parsons/Archer. Not in tandem with the E.

alas why we need the Queens Blvd bypass

[1995 Orion V CNG]

If any new line is built for the SIR, They are going to need a couple hundred new subway cars. 

[TheNewYorkElevated]

Maybe bring back the old fleet (R10's to the R40's) into service to help overcrowding?

[bobtehpanda]

Maybe bring back the old fleet (R10's to the R40's) into service to help overcrowding?

 

Most of those cars were scrapped or are sitting on the bottom of the ocean at this point. The MTA doesn't keep cars it doesn't need just to have them around when it feels lonely...

[MysteriousBtrain]

Maybe bring back the old fleet (R10's to the R40's) into service to help overcrowding?

These guys are way beyond retirement. Even the R32s and R42s that survived can't really be used for extra service. 

[Javier]

Exactly, the R32's are only used for the , and the is a really old line that dosent carry a lot of passengers. To me the R32's are dangerous because they don't have the chime sound like on the R62's and R142's.

[Union Tpke]

The R32s are old but are still strong and are operating well. They break down more often like any subway car. Once the R179s come I hope that they can stay around for a few years until 2019 with fleet expansion with the coming of the R211s.

[MysteriousBtrain]

The R32s are old but are still strong and are operating well. They break down more often like any subway car. Once the R179s come I hope that they can stay around for a few years until 2019 with fleet expansion with the coming of the R211s.

Well the R42s are going first so we have some time. And yes maybe it would be wise to keep some R32s untill the R211s at this point, even if the R32s would operate for emergencies only in 2019.

[Javier]

As they say, "The old is the wise."

[LTA1992]

I've begun planning more extensions and new routes for the boroughs of Manhattan and Queens. The main part of the new plans being a line along Northern Boulevard in Queens to help relieve the of it's crowding as well as provide rapid transit to unserved portions of Queens, like College Point, Whitestone, and Douglaston. The would be one of the routes serving the Northern Boulevard line. I'm still working out the Manhattan connections but I'm thinking of connecting one of the routes to a planned 10th Avenue extension of the route and a new 9th Avenue Line to Greenwich Village. I do know, however, that 57th Street would be the crosstown route for the line.

I've decided on putting this route on hold as a "Phase II" of expansion as I re-tool plans for the 1st Avenue system. Why? In a strike of insight while taking one of my walks, I've found a way to provide Staten Island with rapid transit service while integrating the Northern Boulevard Line with 1st Avenue. What I have decided on is having the Staten Island routes use 5th Avenue in Brooklyn instead of further crowding the DeKalb Avenue interchange and modifying the 4th Avenue line to handle the extra service. instead, the 5th Avenue line would be a limited stop service, stopping at Atlantic-Barclays, 36th Street-5th Ave, and 59th Street-4th Avenue only before proceeding to Staten Island. The SI line will be part of phase II as will the 10th Avenue, Northern Boulevard, Tremont Avenue-Crosstown, Clove Road, and Victory Boulevard lines. Expect the re-tooled 1st Avenue (Phase I) system tomorrow.

[LTA1992]

Well, I've been planning this out for about a week, and am still planning. This is my proposal for a new set of lines that converge into a 1st Avenue Trunk Line. The idea came to me when I realized that the current Second Avenue subway plans won't truly solve the East Side subway problem, being only two tracks. Even if it is extended to another borough, at max, it can only hold three services. The and on the upper section. Then the and a possible line from Queens on the lower portion. Being an all local, how attractive could it really be to those passing through Manhattan?

 

The First Avenue Subway is a plan that adds 7 routes to the system that will serve not only Manhattans East side, but also serve The Bronx, Brooklyn, and Queens. The Trunk Line in Manhattan will be a six track line and will consist of two levels. The upper level will contain 4 tracks and host regular local and express services. A two track lower level will host super express trains. The trunk line itself will hold 7 services and will allow for up to 60 trains per hour. An 8th route will be a line that runs via a spur from the 8th Avenue line and adding a local service to a trunk line in Williamsburg. Let's just pretend this city has money and can demolish buildings to make a new street. Yeah, let's do that. I'm still planning outer borough connections but I've planned for services in Brooklyn as well. When it comes to services, there aren't enough letters in the alphabet, so I've taken the from Jamaica. Sorry passengers, but PROGRESS!

 

The line in Manhattan will be six tracks from the Harlem River to just about East 5th Street. At Houston Street, the line will split, with 6 tracks running east via Houston to Brooklyn, and two tracks will continue downtown to Fulton Center.

 

Super Express Lines: and

Express Lines: (P), , and

Local Routes (In Manhattan): (X) and

8th Avenue Spur and 2nd Brooklyn Local: [The World Trade Center Station will no longer be in use for regular service]

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stations are:

 

125th Street [Local]

116th Street [Local]

110th Street [Local]

103rd Street [Local]

96th Street [super Express]

86th Street [Local]

79th Street [Local]

70th Street [Express]

61st Street [Local]

57th Street [Local]

49th Street [Local]

42nd Street-United Nations [super Express] (Xfer to )

34th Street [Express]

29th Street [Local]

20th Street-Stuyvesant Town [Local]

14th Street [Express] (Xfer to )

St. Marks Place-East Village [Local]

[Around E 5 Street, two extra tracks are created, a Local and an Express utilizes them. Both services will make all stops.]

Houston Street [super Express] (Xfer to )

*Note, the Main Trunk has turned onto Houston at this station. The downtown branch remains on Allen Street (1st Avenue)

 

Main Trunk stations after Houston:

 

Avenue C [Local]

*The line then heads to Brooklyn. Next stop: Washington Plaza [Local]

 

Branch Line Stations:

 

Delancey Street-Allen Street [Transfer to and ]

Chatham Square [Transfer to and ]

Church Street-Broadway (Transfer to and ) *Last Stop

 

8th Avenue Spur [via Worth Street and East Broadway] stations:

 

Lafayette Street

Chatham Square

Essex-Rutgers Streets

Columbia Street

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Some details on station locations:

 

125th Street pretty much sits under the Triborough Bridge. It provides transit for the adjoining housing projects.

70th and 29th Street stations are to serve hospitals in the area. 70th is Express because it serves more hospitals.

20th Street exists to give the residents of Peter Cooper village and Stuy Town more transit options.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On the Lower Manhattan branch, just south of Houston Street station at Stanton Street would be a provision for a spur to connect to the Grand Street Station for possible service across the Manhattan Bridge. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This post will evolve over the coming days and weeks as I plan. Brooklyn is almost done. The sole Queens line is still in planning and the Bronx lines are also in planning. Thanks for reading.

These are the changes to the 1st Avenue Trunk Line to accommodate Phase II connections to Queens and the SI Line. I've also decided on the station design of the 42nd Street-United Nations and 49th Street stations:

 

Due to the nature of 1st Avenue between 49th Street and 36th Street, I have conceived a solution:

 

For 42nd Street-United Nations: The local tracks will need to be at the same level as the 1st Avenue Tunnel, so the Express Tracks would have to dip down to the Super Express Level. The 42nd Street station itself, like all Super Express stations would be two levels. The upper level would have the local tracks being at the same level as the 1st Avenue tunnel, with side platforms opposite to the 1st Avenue Tunnel walls. The Express/Super Express Level would be you're typical Express level setup. The Mezzanine level would be similar to Bowling Greens. It would be between the two levels, allowing crossovers as well. The southern exit would be at 42nd Street. The northern exit would be at 44th Street.

 

For 49th Street station: The station setup would be similar to 110th Street on the IND 8th Avenue-Washington Heights line. The difference being that there is a road tunnel where the express tracks would be.

 

The other option is making the two stations 6 tracks wide.

----------------------------------------------------------------

The line will include provisions for connections to the Northern Boulevard and 57th Street-Crosstown Lines as well as the 5th Avenue (Brooklyn)-Staten Island line in Lower Manhattan.

 

At 54th Street, the upper level would widen to 6 tracks, and track ramps would head to the Super Express Level. At that point, the upper level would go back to 4 tracks wide and the lower level would also be 4 tracks wide. After a provision for a crossover between the Super Express tracks and the provision, the future trackways would begin to descent and cut off in preparation for connecting with the phase II Northern Boulevard Line which would travel via a tunnel connecting 57th Street in Manhattan with 43rd Avenue in Queens.

 

In Lower Manhattan, in the original plans, there would have been a provision for the SI line to travel from the Lower Manhattan Branch to Chrystie Street. In my retooling, the SI line would get it's own, limited stop, line in Brooklyn. At East 5th Street, the upper level would widen to 6-tracks. Connections from both the local and express tracks would be made and the tracks would ramp down to the lower level. A connection would be made form the Super Express tracks and the two extra tracks would ramp down to a third level, with the tracks moving under the Super Express tracks. Meanwhile, right after the SI provision ramps ramped down, the Lower Manhattan Branch tracks would branch from the Local and Express tracks an ramp down to the third level, which would be 4 tracks wide. When the Main and Super Exp level are under private property while turning onto Houston Street, the Lower Manhattan tracks would rise to an upper level. The Houston Street station on the Lower Manhattan branch would be two levels, with the lower level not being in service until SI service begins.

------------------------------------------------

Lower Manhattan branch service would end at Church Street and Park Row with a connecting passageway to Fulton Center allowing free transfers.

----------------------------------------------

My following posts over the coming days and weeks will detail the phase two lines.

[BxM4Woodlawn]

my new proposals

swicth the and the terminals, meaning the will go to Bedford Park during rush hours, and stop at 145th other times, and the will go to 168th Street. 

Make the run 7 days a week

Make the run weekdays only and terminate at the World Trade Center

reroute the to the Fulton Avenue Line and terminate at Euclid Avenue

extend the down the Culver Line to Coney Island

[Wallyhorse]

That will NEVER work:

There will be MASSIVE howls from Park Slope residents if you take away their service and send the via the Fulton Street line on a full-time basis.

[qjtransitmaster]

alas why we need the Queens Blvd bypass

well we could reconfigure LIRR fares between Manhattan & queens to have the same effect. No build needed other than the upcoming ESA ect.

[bobtehpanda]

well we could reconfigure LIRR fares between Manhattan & queens to have the same effect. No build needed other than the upcoming ESA ect.

 

-Besides the fact that LIRR trains are pretty much already full during peak hours, but who needs facts?-

[MysteriousBtrain]

my new proposals

swicth the and the terminals, meaning the will go to Bedford Park during rush hours, and stop at 145th other times, and the will go to 168th Street. 

Make the run 7 days a week

Make the run weekdays only and terminate at the World Trade Center

reroute the to the Fulton Avenue Line and terminate at Euclid Avenue

extend the down the Culver Line to Coney Island

: not enough ridership for the weekends

:Ok, but I would say to extend it to 168 Street weekends like in the 1990's because of my comment for the . And also, leave the on Fulton Street.

/ : NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!! The Culver line needs Manhattan service. Do you not see the reason express service was discontinued on the line? Because the passengers riding the local stops want direct service to Manhattan.

Edited December 4, 2014 by MysteriousBtrain

[Union Tpke]

-Besides the fact that LIRR trains are pretty much already full during peak hours, but who needs facts?-

Totally agree

The E is crush loaded and the bypass could have trains serving port washington via the port washington branch 

this link shows a proposal to avoid the grade crossing

http://queenstransit.wordpress.com/2013/03/10/tomorrows-subway-7-line-extension-northern-line/

Also there could be a branch that merges back with the QBL at Forest Hills and then goes via the Locust Manor Brach to rosedale

The third service would be the F.

The M would become a Second Avenue service to Met Av as the additional Queens Blvd express and the V would be brought in as a local

[bobtehpanda]

my new proposals

swicth the and the terminals, meaning the will go to Bedford Park during rush hours, and stop at 145th other times, and the will go to 168th Street. 

Make the run 7 days a week

Make the run weekdays only and terminate at the World Trade Center

reroute the to the Fulton Avenue Line and terminate at Euclid Avenue

extend the down the Culver Line to Coney Island

 

There is no need to run the 24/7.

WTC already has issues trying to terminate all the trains it handles, so making it terminate the as well would turn 8th Avenue into a giant mess.

The is fine where it belongs.

That's probably the quickest way to decimate Culver Line ridership.

 

I don't understand what the purpose of this is. You actually reduce cross-Hudson capacity by doing this, when there's no clear reason to do so right now.

[bobtehpanda]

Totally agree

The E is crush loaded and the bypass could have trains serving port washington via the port washington branch 

this link shows a proposal to avoid the grade crossing

http://queenstransit.wordpress.com/2013/03/10/tomorrows-subway-7-line-extension-northern-line/

Also there could be a branch that merges back with the QBL at Forest Hills and then goes via the Locust Manor Brach to rosedale

The third service would be the F.

The M would become a Second Avenue service to Met Av as the additional Queens Blvd express and the V would be brought in as a local

 

-Note to self: delete that website-

 

I really don't understand what you're going on about with the part involving Rosedale and the M...

[MysteriousBtrain]

As long as we are on the Queens Blvd bypass, I say that if is does get created, the tracks should be like the PATH when it becomes an elevated to the Newark Penn station. One or two tracks could be built on the Northern Queens Branch from 21 Street to forest hills like it originally was planned. The single or 2 tracks built would become NYCT exclusive while the LIRR tracks would be LIRR exclusive.

[Wallyhorse]

There is no need to run the 24/7.

WTC already has issues trying to terminate all the trains it handles, so making it terminate the as well would turn 8th Avenue into a giant mess.

The is fine where it belongs.

That's probably the quickest way to decimate Culver Line ridership.

 

I don't understand what the purpose of this is. You actually reduce cross-Hudson capacity by doing this, when there's no clear reason to do so right now.

Right!!

 

If anything, the part up to Church Avenue needs more service, which was why I proposed for a Culver Express having the run via the after West 4th and have the become such.   That would be WAY more likely than having just the along a very heavily ridden area.