Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[Lance]

Got it. I haven't looked at the 4th Plan since it came out last year.

I don't know how that would work with the and running along the three-tracked Concourse line. I'd imagine that would become quite the point of congestion, especially with the subpar setups at Bedford Park and 205 Street.

[officiallyliam]

14 minutes ago, Lance said:

Got it. I haven't looked at the 4th Plan since it came out last year.

I don't know how that would work with the and running along the three-tracked Concourse line. I'd imagine that would become quite the point of congestion, especially with the subpar setups at Bedford Park and 205 Street.

Yeah, I'm not a huge fan of that idea. The Concourse line could be more frequent and reliable, but that could just mean making the and service better; adding a merge with the into the mix probably won't do a whole lot to help.

I'm surprised that the RPA didn't include any central Bronx extension, either via Third Avenue or along the MNRR right-of-way. That would do a lot more for the Bronx.

[RR503]

Why in god’s name would you send SAS up Concourse? You’re locking  and  at 10tph/line for eternity. 

Thats also like saying to 3rd ave “heyyy you’re gonna get subway service. Look, it’s coming. We’ve built to 3/149....and oops it’s heading to Concourse. Better luck next time, when the next new Manhattan trunk is built.” 

The RPA says it’ll serve 3rd with better ‘regional rail’ service, but let’s face it, unless you vastly increase the capacity of MNR rolling stock, jack service levels beyond 2 tph, and make all the junctions less messy, that’ll never be adequate. 

Edited March 30, 2018 by RR503

[Coney Island Av]

I agree with @RR503 adding the  to Concourse will only drastically limit service and create a conga line. Norwood-205th can't handle that much TPH, and BPB can't either. 

Just extend the SAS first to 3 Av-149, then up 3 Av to Gun Hill. That's way more cost-effective than inundating Concourse with delays...

[CenSin]

1 hour ago, LGA Link N train said:

Who remembers that RPA proposal where the would connect with the Concourse line? Does that have any Benefits???

Screw the and with reverse branching, and then merge with the too for a second round of reverse branching! There’s so much winning, I can’t even… /s

[Lance]

I'm in agreement with the last few posts in that a line straight up 3rd Avenue or something would be much more beneficial than trying to tie Second Ave to the Concourse with some hackneyed connection. Webster Ave would probably be the best road to use since it's wider and straighter than the narrow, windy 3rd Avenue. I'm not sure a MNRR ROW subway route would be feasible as you'd have to dig under the already canalized ROW.

12 minutes ago, CenSin said:

Screw the and with reverse branching, and then merge with the too for a second round of reverse branching! There’s so much winning, I can’t even… /s

Well Donnie did say we'd be tired of all the winning...

[CenSin]

2 minutes ago, Lance said:

Well Donnie did say we'd be tired of all the winning...

Thinking about it, this is actually the cheapest way to bring direct 2 Avenue service to the Bronx. There are so many problems with this, but if it gets built, the only upside I can see to this is the occasional reroute. Send those and trains down 2 Avenue when Central Park West is out of service, then let the , , , and trains sort themselves out at Lexington Avenue/63 Street. Or if the problem is 6 Avenue, let them go down Broadway to DeKalb Avenue or down 2 Avenue to Grand Street. Since it’s still too early to say if the MTA will go cheap and connect 2 Avenue to Nassau Street, having and trains run via Nassau Street to DeKalb Avenue might also be an option. After all, connecting 2 Avenue to Grand Concourse is the same line of reasoning.

[Lance]

Of course, that would be a big F U to the many folks along the 3rd Avenue corridor who've dealt with insufficient transit service since '73.

[RR503]

Just now, CenSin said:

Thinking about it, this is actually the cheapest way to bring direct 2 Avenue service to the Bronx. There are so many problems with this, but if it gets built, the only upside I can see to this is the occasional reroute. Send those and trains down 2 Avenue when Central Park West is out of service, then let the , , , and trains sort themselves out at Lexington Avenue/63 Street. Or if the problem is 6 Avenue, let them go down Broadway to DeKalb Avenue or down 2 Avenue to Grand Street. Since it’s still too early to say if the MTA will go cheap and connect 2 Avenue to Nassau Street, having and trains run via Nassau Street to DeKalb Avenue might also be an option. After all, connecting 2 Avenue to Grand Concourse is the same line of reasoning.

Sure, it's cheapest, but that means nothing. You're hobbling  and  service forever, adding a merge to all those lines, and neglecting to serve new areas. At least with Nassau the  and  are already limited by the bridge, whereas the  and  could probably both absorb an additional 5tph apiece (with some small tweaks to DeKalb, of course). Adding a  to the mix would forever prevent that. 

[bobtehpanda]

It's important to note that the addition of the is not a net capacity increase. At the end of the day one direction will always be limited to one track.

Webster/Park/Third or terminate at 3 Av/149 and call it a day.

[officiallyliam]

2 hours ago, CenSin said:

Thinking about it, this is actually the cheapest way to bring direct 2 Avenue service to the Bronx. There are so many problems with this, but if it gets built, the only upside I can see to this is the occasional reroute. Send those and trains down 2 Avenue when Central Park West is out of service, then let the , , , and trains sort themselves out at Lexington Avenue/63 Street. Or if the problem is 6 Avenue, let them go down Broadway to DeKalb Avenue or down 2 Avenue to Grand Street. Since it’s still too early to say if the MTA will go cheap and connect 2 Avenue to Nassau Street, having and trains run via Nassau Street to DeKalb Avenue might also be an option. After all, connecting 2 Avenue to Grand Concourse is the same line of reasoning.

The problem here isn't that the Bronx needs service to Second Avenue; the problem here is that there are corridors in the Bronx that need subway service more than the Grand Concourse needs a third subway service.

[W4ST]

I personally think that the  /  should go down Nassau Street. I think that the  could terminate at Chambers Street, the  could end at Broad Street, the  could run under a new tunnel from Whitehall to Court Street, and the   could go to Bay Ridge. Just an idea though.

[bobtehpanda]

3 hours ago, W4ST said:

I personally think that the  /  should go down Nassau Street. I think that the  could terminate at Chambers Street, the  could end at Broad Street, the  could run under a new tunnel from Whitehall to Court Street, and the   could go to Bay Ridge. Just an idea though.

Way more disruptive than current plans using the Water St route for not that much additional benefit. Not only would you have to rip apart Chinatown and suspend service to Nassau while constructing the northern junction, the southern junction would basically be impossible to build; Montague's junction is basically, if not actually under the East River, and if you try building that connection on the Brooklyn side you have to weave under the IRT and there's no path from Montague to Court St.

[CenSin]

9 hours ago, officiallyliam said:

The problem here isn't that the Bronx needs service to Second Avenue; the problem here is that there are corridors in the Bronx that need subway service more than the Grand Concourse needs a third subway service.

The problem may be different, but the way the MTA’s “solving” the problem sure makes it seem this way. It’s all been about taking people off the Lexington Avenue Line recently. The idea behind connecting the 2 Avenue Line to the Grand Concourse Line is probably to siphon people off the .

When has 3 Avenue been discussed by any officials recently?

Edited March 31, 2018 by CenSin

[W4ST]

6 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

Way more disruptive than current plans using the Water St route for not that much additional benefit. Not only would you have to rip apart Chinatown and suspend service to Nassau while constructing the northern junction, the southern junction would basically be impossible to build; Montague's junction is basically, if not actually under the East River, and if you try building that connection on the Brooklyn side you have to weave under the IRT and there's no path from Montague to Court St.

Yeah, I see what you mean. I don't think I thought it through enough. On vanshnookenraggen's map though I saw a bellmouth south of Whitehall street for a possible alternative tunnel to Atlantic Avenue. Could those be used?

[CenSin]

8 minutes ago, W4ST said:

Yeah, I see what you mean. I don't think I thought it through enough. On vanshnookenraggen's map though I saw a bellmouth south of Whitehall street for a possible alternative tunnel to Atlantic Avenue. Could those be used?

You’ve looked at the area in person, right? I don’t think there is a way to make a connection other than a level junction. And at that point, engineering is going to be quite a challenge. You would have to seal up the connection point pretty well (prior to the actual work) to prevent Whitehall Street and the tunnel from flooding.

Edited March 31, 2018 by CenSin

[W4ST]

Also, I was thinking about going to Grand Street, then to Chambers. I probably should have said that more clearly. I wouldn't want it to be bad for Chinatown though. If going to Nassau be done without causing damage there, I would go with their current plans to Hanover Sq.

[W4ST]

5 minutes ago, CenSin said:

You’ve looked at the area in person, right? I don’t think there is a way to make a connection other than a level junction. And at that point, engineering is going to be quite a challenge. You would have to seal up the connection point pretty well (prior to the actual work) to prevent Whitehall Street and the tunnel from flooding.

I have been through there but I have not looked out for the actual bellmouth itself, just the tunnel. Looking back it would probably be too much work. I didn't think my plans through well enough.

[KK 6 Ave Local]

The K line (orange bullet)

Runs on R68s

Goes on the Amtrak ROW in East Bronx, then onto 125th street, crosses 125th onto ABCD, goes onto 6th avenue, the goes onto the Yellow Line PATH tracks if possible, the into NJ, ending at Journal Square. 

I DONT KNOW IF IT CAN WORK SO NO HATE PLEASE 

[KK 6 Ave Local]

Oh I forgot to say,The northern terminal is Co-op City

[T to Dyre Avenue]

19 hours ago, LGA Link N train said:

Who remembers that RPA proposal where the would connect with the Concourse line? Does that have any Benefits???

None really. Other than saving money. 

I mean I’d understand if they’d suggest connecting the  or  to the  line north of 149th (understand that would require shaving back the platforms to accommodate B Division cars) because at least that’s just replacing one service with another (I recall seeing a fantasy map with this very idea). But cramming the  or  onto Concourse only severely limits all services on all three services. Of course, my preference is for the SAS Bronx service to go up Third Ave. But if the only option to go deep into the Bronx is via an existing line, Concourse is the last place it should be. At least with Jerome, if the  or  went there, it could still use the same yard as the  without interfering with their services.

Edited March 31, 2018 by T to Dyre Avenue

[CenSin]

7 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

None really. Other than saving money. 

I mean I’d understand if they’d suggest connecting the  or  to the  line north of 149th (understand that would require shaving back the platforms to accommodate B Division cars) because at least that’s just replacing one service with another (I recall seeing a fantasy map with this very idea). But cramming the  or  onto Concourse only severely limits all services on all three services. Of course, my preference is for the SAS Bronx service to go up Third Ave. But if the only option to go deep into the Bronx is via an existing line, Concourse is the last place it should be. At least with Jerome, if the  or  went there, it could still use the same yard as the  without interfering with their services.

Interestingly, a Woodlawn connection would probably truncate the to 149 Street–Grand Concourse, making it largely redundant with the in Manhattan and the in Brooklyn. I wonder how this might affect the ’s status.

149 Street–Grand Concourse would effectively become a short-turn station for the Lexington Avenue Line. With one branch removed, the could replace the in the Bronx becoming a full-time line between Eastchester–Dyre Avenue and Crown Heights–Utica Avenue. At night the would be completely offline with the running from Eastchester–Dyre Avenue to New Lots Avenue.

[bobtehpanda]

9 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

None really. Other than saving money. 

I mean I’d understand if they’d suggest connecting the  or  to the  line north of 149th (understand that would require shaving back the platforms to accommodate B Division cars) because at least that’s just replacing one service with another (I recall seeing a fantasy map with this very idea). But cramming the  or  onto Concourse only severely limits all services on all three services. Of course, my preference is for the SAS Bronx service to go up Third Ave. But if the only option to go deep into the Bronx is via an existing line, Concourse is the last place it should be. At least with Jerome, if the  or  went there, it could still use the same yard as the  without interfering with their services.

I would imagine that under this scenario all service to Concourse would just stop.

It's stupid but you could make it work.

[LGA Link N Train]

12 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

I would imagine that under this scenario all service to Concourse would just stop.

Well in that case, send it to 168 St

 

[officiallyliam]

3 minutes ago, LGA Link N train said:

Well in that case, send it to 168 St

No, don’t do that. There’s nothing to be gained; all it’ll do is delay both  and  trains because of fumigation.