Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[Brooklyn]

Mind you, the is a crosstown. Whatever route it goes, it should fulfill the ideal of connecting as many stops in Queens and Brooklyn as possible whether they be on existing lines or line yet to be built. Connecting the to Astoria isn’t necessarily the only way to eliminate the 3-seat Astoria-Flushing-Crosstown ( ) link. They could also connect Queens Plaza to Queensboro Plaza and restore service to Queens Boulevard. Of course, the Queens bypass would also have to be built to move some traffic off the Queens Boulevard trunk as well.

 

 

Making Queensboro Plaza and Queens Plaza into one station probably should have been done a long time ago. That would give a lot of operational flexibility....You could run a shuttle to Astoria and have people transfer if you need to cut N service. If 7 trains need to be cut, you have another transfer point.

 

I agree about the bypass....no brainer, but the political will is lacking. Nothing I'd like to see more than the E and F running back on 53rd st and the G and R back as the two locals.

[BreeddekalbL]

wasn't one of the reasons they took the off of 53rd cause i remember that the crowds really were packed into the station like gills and it was a safety hazard

[Brooklyn]

wasn't one of the reasons they took the off of 53rd cause i remember that the crowds really were packed into the station like gills and it was a safety hazard

 

Still is a safety hazard with the M....

 

I really hate the M train alignment--very disruptive IMO. And F train riders from Brooklyn would like to get to Midtown East (50s) too. The Queens Blvd alignment in the 90s was good. Just add a bypass line, and you're set. I like having the G on Queens Blvd....You have a feeder line so riders don't have long gaps of service on the local tracks . You're also helping even the crowds on the express trains by this too. I think it's better for everyone if the G came back.

[checkmatechamp13]

Still is a safety hazard with the M....

 

I really hate the M train alignment--very disruptive IMO. And F train riders from Brooklyn would like to get to Midtown East (50s) too. The Queens Blvd alignment in the 90s was good. Just add a bypass line, and you're set. I like having the G on Queens Blvd....You have a feeder line so riders don't have long gaps of service on the local tracks . You're also helping even the crowds on the express trains by this too. I think it's better for everyone if the G came back.

 

The thing is that if you have four lines running along QB, you might as well have them run to Manhattan instead of having the use up space when it doesn't even run to Manhattan.

 

Also, it provides a direct ride to 6th Avenue for Queens Blvd local riders (so at least they have the option of staying on the train instead of being forced to transfer to the ). 

[Around the Horn]

Still is a safety hazard with the M....

 

I really hate the M train alignment--very disruptive IMO. And F train riders from Brooklyn would like to get to Midtown East (50s) too. The Queens Blvd alignment in the 90s was good. Just add a bypass line, and you're set. I like having the G on Queens Blvd....You have a feeder line so riders don't have long gaps of service on the local tracks . You're also helping even the crowds on the express trains by this too. I think it's better for everyone if the G came back.

The G on Queens Blvd is useless. Additional Manhattan bound capacity via the M is a necessity even with a bypass.

[Wallyhorse]

The G on Queens Blvd is useless. Additional Manhattan bound capacity via the M is a necessity even with a bypass.

Right.  The only way the and could all run on QB is to have them all go to 179th since after Parsons Boulevard. if you have a conga line you can move locals to the express track as needed as anyone looking for 169 can simply take the next train that comes in.  .  

[Lance]

We all heard you the first time. Give it a rest.

[Wallyhorse]

We all heard you the first time. Give it a rest.

I was only noting it to prove a point.

[Brooklyn]

The thing is that if you have four lines running along QB, you might as well have them run to Manhattan instead of having the use up space when it doesn't even run to Manhattan.

 

Also, it provides a direct ride to 6th Avenue for Queens Blvd local riders (so at least they have the option of staying on the train instead of being forced to transfer to the ). 

 

With a bypass, there'd be five lines--I think four is enough. If you had the bypass going local to 179th after 71st Continental, effectively making the F and express throughout Queens, you'd pick up a lot of those Jamaica passengers. If they catch the G instead of the R, they'll have room on either the E or the F at Roosevelt or Queens Plaza for a transfer. And you won't have a gap in local service if things go wrong in Manhattan, which they often do.

 

And you'd have lines which don't merge as much--helping maintain reliability of service and a more even distribution of passengers.

 

 

 

The G on Queens Blvd is useless. Additional Manhattan bound capacity via the M is a necessity even with a bypass.

 

I wouldn't say useless.....i think it's also about having a reliable feeder line and having even service along the local. It's also about streamlining service and not having them merge as much.

 

Not to mention, I'd imagine the market has grown for a Brooklyn QB service.

 

Bottom line, the bypass is the priority. But I think if the bypass happens, the need for a orange M (with the F going back to 53rd st) would diminish.

 

And many F train riders from Brooklyn would like that Midtown East Stop back.....it would save a transfer at Bleecker for the 6.

Edited July 4, 2017 by Brooklyn

[CenSin]

Still is a safety hazard with the M....

 

I really hate the M train alignment--very disruptive IMO. And F train riders from Brooklyn would like to get to Midtown East (50s) too. The Queens Blvd alignment in the 90s was good. Just add a bypass line, and you're set. I like having the G on Queens Blvd....You have a feeder line so riders don't have long gaps of service on the local tracks . You're also helping even the crowds on the express trains by this too. I think it's better for everyone if the G came back.

The bypass line would feed into 63 Street, taking away a lot of the passengers that would otherwise be congesting 53 Street/Lexington Avenue. Say this line is build after phase 3 of SAS, the line has good potential to reduce the concern at 53 Street/Lexington Avenue, making crowding issues a moot point.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

With a bypass, there'd be five lines--I think four is enough. If you had the bypass going local to 179th after 71st Continental, effectively making the F and express throughout Queens, you'd pick up a lot of those Jamaica passengers. If they catch the G instead of the R, they'll have room on either the E or the F at Roosevelt or Queens Plaza for a transfer. And you won't have a gap in local service if things go wrong in Manhattan, which they often do.

 

And you'd have lines which don't merge as much--helping maintain reliability of service and a more even distribution of passengers.

 

 

 

 

I wouldn't say useless.....i think it's also about having a reliable feeder line and having even service along the local. It's also about streamlining service and not having them merge as much.

 

Not to mention, I'd imagine the market has grown for a Brooklyn QB service.

 

Bottom line, the bypass is the priority. But I think if the bypass happens, the need for a orange M (with the F going back to 53rd st) would diminish.

 

And many F train riders from Brooklyn would like that Midtown East Stop back.....it would save a transfer at Bleecker for the 6.

The need for the orange would not diminish if the bypass because the would stay at 63rd. Why would it go back to 53rd when there's already a provision for a bypass line in the 63rd St tunnel east of Queensbridge?

[Around the Horn]

With a bypass, there'd be five lines--I think four is enough. If you had the bypass going local to 179th after 71st Continental, effectively making the F and express throughout Queens, you'd pick up a lot of those Jamaica passengers. If they catch the G instead of the R, they'll have room on either the E or the F at Roosevelt or Queens Plaza for a transfer. And you won't have a gap in local service if things go wrong in Manhattan, which they often do.

 

And you'd have lines which don't merge as much--helping maintain reliability of service and a more even distribution of passengers.

 

 

 

 

I wouldn't say useless.....i think it's also about having a reliable feeder line and having even service along the local. It's also about streamlining service and not having them merge as much.

 

Not to mention, I'd imagine the market has grown for a Brooklyn QB service.

 

Bottom line, the bypass is the priority. But I think if the bypass happens, the need for a orange M (with the F going back to 53rd st) would diminish.

 

And many F train riders from Brooklyn would like that Midtown East Stop back.....it would save a transfer at Bleecker for the 6.

 

The is never returning to 53rd Street and the is never going away.

[Lawrence St]

If someone brings up the coming back I swear...

[T to Dyre Avenue]

If someone brings up the coming back I swear...

The letter V can come back and be reused for a different service, such as a second 2nd Ave service south of 63rd St. Or as a South Brooklyn IND express between Jay St and Church Avenue. Nothing wrong with either of those. Obviously it wouldn't make sense to bring it back the service from 2002-10. Edited July 4, 2017 by T to Dyre Avenue

[Jemorie]

The letter V can come back and be reused for a different service, such as a second 2nd Ave service south of 63rd St. Or as a South Brooklyn IND express between Jay St and Church Avenue. Nothing wrong with either of those. Obviously it wouldn't make sense to bring it back the service from 2002-10.

 

As long as it's either of those, then no problem.

[Lawrence St]

I meant someone bringing up about the 2002-2010 returning and the becoming brown again. It gets me worked on when someone is that stupid to propose something like this.

[CenSin]

I meant someone bringing up about the 2002-2010 returning and the becoming brown again. It gets me worked on when someone is that stupid to propose something like this.

Times change. Remember when people proposing the orange (the one that exists today) was stupid and ridiculous? The object of ridicule is always that which challenges the status quo for some reason.

[MysteriousBtrain]

Times change. Remember when people proposing the orange (the one that exists today) was stupid and ridiculous? The object of ridicule is always that which challenges the status quo for some reason.

Yeah but today the is an extension with a different label. At this point the is a dead horse.

[BreeddekalbL]

and the could possibly come back as queens bypass service? who knows

[Around the Horn]

and the could possibly come back as queens bypass service? who knows

 

If the were to return as the SAS-Queens service, it would virtually require the bypass because of how high the frequencies would need to be to handle the ridership it would get.

[BreeddekalbL]

If the were to return as the SAS-Queens service, it would virtually require the bypass because of how high the frequencies would need to be to handle the ridership it would get.

 

yes we should build it and tell koslowitz to go eat dirt.

[MysteriousBtrain]

Technically not a subway line but.....

What if the LGA Airtrain ran between Mets-Willets Point and The Hub using part of the Port Morris branch and NIMBYism didn't stop it? South of 141 St, the line would run it's own ROW then operate over 19 Av and make stops at A, B, C and D.

[bobtehpanda]

Technically not a subway line but.....

What if the LGA Airtrain ran between Mets-Willets Point and The Hub using part of the Port Morris branch and NIMBYism didn't stop it? South of 141 St, the line would run it's own ROW then operate over 19 Av and make stops at A, B, C and D.

 

Well, you miss the entirely. This just doubles the existing problems with the LGA AirTrain, where you have to backtrack south after going north to go LaGuardia (as opposed to going east to Willets and backtracking west).

[BreeddekalbL]

I saw a proposal that i think is very insane that someone proposed on subchat  btw this proposal is not mine 

http://www.subchat.com/read.asp?Id=1443196

Jamaica Center, Queens to Church Ave, Brooklyn
Via Queens Blvd Express, 53rd street, 8th Avenue Local, Culver line
All Times
Rush Hour Frequency: 10 TPH

Hillside-179st, Queens to Coney Island, Brooklyn
Via Queens Blvd Express, 53rd street, 6th Avenue Local, Culver line (express between Church Ave and Bergen Street Lower Level)
All Times
Rush Hour Frequency: 10 TPH

71st-Continential, Queens to Church Ave, Brooklyn
Via Queens Blvd Local, Crosstown Line, Culver Line
All Times
Rush Hour Frequency: 10 TPH

71st-Continential, Queens to Metropolitan Ave, Queens
Via Queens Blvd Local, 63rd Street, 6th Avenue Local, Williamsburg Bridge, Myrtle Ave Line
All Times except late nights. Late nights shuttle between Myrtle Ave and Metropolitan Ave
Rush Hour Frequency: 10 TPH

96th Street-2nd Ave to Coney Island
Via Second Ave Subway, Broadway Express, Manhattan Bridge, 4th Ave Express, Sea Beach Line
All Times. Late Nights local in Manhattan and Brooklyn via Lower Manhattan. 
Rush Hour Frequency: 10 TPH

96th Street-2nd Avenue to Coney Island
Via Second Ave Subway, Broadway Express, Manhattan Bridge, Brighton Line
All Times. 
Rush Hour Frequency: 10 TPH

Hillside-179st, Queens to 95th Street-Bay Ridge
Via Queens Blvd Express, 60th Street, Broadway Local, Montague St tunnel, 4th Ave Local
All Times except late nights. 
Rush Hour Frequency: 10 TPH

Astoria-Ditmars, Queens to Whitehall St, Manhattan
Via Astoria Line, 60th Street, Broadway Local
All Times. Late nights extended to Bay Ridge along 4th Ave Local to replace
Rush Hour Frequency: 20 TPH

Why did I come up with this plan? Here’s the benefits as I see them:

1) Much more service to the SAS and Astoria
Here’s the rush hour branch frequencies laid out:
SAS: 20 tph (N/Q)
Astoria: 20 tph
QB Express: 30 tph (E/F/R)
QB Local: 20 tph (G/M)

As you can see, both the SAS and Astoria get the service increases they very much need without negatively affecting the other lines. It’s time that Astoria finally be treated as a major line worthy of trunk style service. 

2) Eliminates switching on Broadway Line
This finally puts an end to the incessant switching between express and local that has 
Always slowed down Broadway service. N/Q trains glide off the Bridge, along the 
Express, and then up Second Ave, leaving the Locals to do their thing between Lower
Manhattan and 60th Street. 

3) Rebalances Queens Blvd Express loading, reducing pressure on the E
For the first time, QB riders can get onto Broadway using an express service, which together with restoring 53rd Street service will help to dissipate crowding on the and reduce crowding along 53rd Street in general. QB Riders will have the ultimate in choice in terms of getting to Manhattan quickly with 3 lines offering convenient east side access (R at 59/Lex, E/F at 53/Lex) as well as two lines to central midtown (F/R)

4) Makes the G great again
With it’s return to Queens Blvd, G riders from Brooklyn will now have convenient 
transfers at Queens Plaza to three Manhattan bound services (E/F/R) which will help 
with the impending L train shutdown. Full length trains and 10 TPH during rush hours
will make this a genuine alternative for Greenpoint and Williamsburg residents. This 
will also give Queens residents a much easier time accessing attractions in Williamsburg. 


5) Helps with the Culver line express situation
With the reopening of the lower level of Bergen Street, riders on the Culver line in Carroll Gardens/Cobble Hill and Park Slope will have increased service with either direct service into Manhattan or grabbing a to transfer at Bergen for the . Culver riders further south get their express service which will translate into a faster ride. 

Edited July 17, 2017 by BreeddekalbL

[bobtehpanda]

Can 60th St even handle 30TPH?