Jump to content

Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas


Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, officiallyliam said:

I've thought about the idea of subway service on the PW Branch. It would certainly work as a relief to the (7) line (with infill stops in Elmhurst and Corona, of course) and serves dense areas of Queens which are far from subway lines. You'd also get the added benefit of freed up capacity along the LIRR to provide more service on the Main Line. Apparently, though, a similar proposal got shot down by residents of Nassau who didn't want the subway in their area; there'd also likely be a need to grade-separate the Little Neck Parkway crossing. Other than that, the branch would be well suited to subway service.

Under this plan, would one or both Broadway express services run all the way out to PW, or could we have perhaps the (N) to PW and the (Q) via the bypass, as an example? It's certainly an idea worth exploring.

This is what I would do if a Port Washington Branch were to be recaptured. The key is strategic overtaking.

Currently, during the PM Peak there are two types of eastbound trains; those that run without stops to Great Neck and then the rest of the way, and those that run all stops to Great Neck. These trains don't depart Penn all that far from each other; the 4:22 is the first express and arrives at 4:48, while the 4:25 is the first all stops and arrives at 5:02.

So express - 24 minutes, local - 37 minutes. Assuming a two minute minimum separation, you can run an example timetable like this:

4:00 express, arrives at Great Neck at 4:24

4:02 local, arrives at Great Neck at 4:39

4:17 express, arrives at Great Neck at 4:41

4:19 local, arrives at Great Neck at 4:56

4:34 express, arrives at Great Neck at 4:58

4:37 local, arrives at Great Neck at 5:13

4:51 express, arrives at Great Neck at 5: 15

4:53 local, arrives at Great Neck at 5:30

So this gives you roughly 7.5TPH, half serving only Great Neck east and half serving only Great Neck west. To put this in perspective, this is about as much service as the (N) trains run today.

 

The maximum TPH you're going to get out of 79th St is 15TPH (the other 15 will head to Forest Hills via the Bypass.) So all you really need to do is exactly double service; this means that you need to introduce an overtake at the halfway point. Each additional stop seems to add 1.625 minutes of travel time; so you need to find the stop that gets stopped at 21 minutes into the trip (assuming additional stops at Broadway, Junction, and 108 St). This almost perfectly lines up with Mets-Willets Point, which coincidentally already has multiple tracks and platforms. And the (unfortunate) development of the LGA AirTrain also provides reasons to make all trains stop at Mets-Willets Point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 12.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 hour ago, officiallyliam said:

It doesn't justify that at all, actually. The PW Branch and Northern Blvd are two different corridors, and Northern Blvd would do a lot more to help out residents of northern Corona and East Elmhurst who are far away from the subway line.

That's only true if we're willing to give a BRT or LRT service on Northern Blvd its own right-of-way. That means going beyond the improvements that are usually part of SAS; it'll mean giving up more of the current road space. I, for one, don't have an issue with that. But considering the backlash that the MTA/DOT usually face for the installation of a simple offset bus lane, I don't think it'll work.

My main issue with a Northern Blvd subway line has always been the fact that ridership along what is now the Q66 is relatively diffuse; most other bus routes that are subway line candidates have enough stops with much higher ridership to justify a limited stop line or an SBS line, and those usually are precursors for much higher investment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Connect Bowling Green and South Ferry/Whitehall Street to create one South Ferry complex with the (1)(4)(5)(R)(W). The stations are ridiculously close.

Now that I’ve seen this, I wonder why Wallyhorse was so insistent on running the Bowling Green–South Ferry shuttle. It seems so wasteful to maintain a train to perform the function of a short moving walkway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, CenSin said:

Connect Bowling Green and South Ferry/Whitehall Street to create one South Ferry complex with the (1)(4)(5)(R)(W). The stations are ridiculously close.

Now that I’ve seen this, I wonder why Wallyhorse was so insistent on running the Bowling Green–South Ferry shuttle. It seems so wasteful to maintain a train to perform the function of a short moving walkway.

If you can somehow do a moving walkway it would work, but there are people (especially late at night) who would be leery of using that to get from Bowling Green to Whitehall/South Ferry who now prefer to likely take the (1) to SF just because it actually goes there.  

The idea of the BG-SF shuttle revival had more to do with OUTSIDE of weekdays when you could extend the (6) to South Ferry (and (5) when NOT running to Brooklyn) and not have those trains fumigating at Bowling Green and delaying (4) trains.  The shuttle as I would do it would only run 5:30 AM-8:00 PM on weekdays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, CenSin said:

Connect Bowling Green and South Ferry/Whitehall Street to create one South Ferry complex with the (1)(4)(5)(R)(W). The stations are ridiculously close.

Now that I’ve seen this, I wonder why Wallyhorse was so insistent on running the Bowling Green–South Ferry shuttle. It seems so wasteful to maintain a train to perform the function of a short moving walkway.

Don't you know those UES socialites who are definitely taking the subway can't walk like the poors? /s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

If you can somehow do a moving walkway it would work, but there are people (especially late at night) who would be leery of using that to get from Bowling Green to Whitehall/South Ferry who now prefer to likely take the (1) to SF just because it actually goes there.  

The idea of the BG-SF shuttle revival had more to do with OUTSIDE of weekdays when you could extend the (6) to South Ferry (and (5) when NOT running to Brooklyn) and not have those trains fumigating at Bowling Green and delaying (4) trains.  The shuttle as I would do it would only run 5:30 AM-8:00 PM on weekdays.

The walkway doesn’t exist. How do you know people would be leery?

If both Atlantic Avenue–Barclays Center and Times Square are viable station complexes with long transfers, a shorter one is absolutely doable. The short passageway between the Lexington Avenue and the Broadway platforms would be less than half a train length. After that, the passenger would be walking down the length of the Broadway platforms and exiting at the south end.

If that is as difficult as you make it sound, then they should be using Access-A-Ride or Uber. (And I’m not sure about the latter because of rape incidences.) Maybe people with fear-induced inability to use such a trivial connection qualifies for Access-A-Ride.

Maps for Comparison

cZsggm0.png

This is South Ferry, where the stations are literally a stone’s throw away (no Olympic throwing skills required).

Uouk6VU.png

The Dey Street connector is suspiciously long. Maybe he should take the train to 59 Street to transfer. I heard the platforms are like… right on top of each other there.

ISgoceX.png

How does a poor soul get from (1)(2)(3) to the (F)(M)(L) when the tunnel to the nearest platform is half a train length?

Ga4wAdK.png

God help whoever finds himself getting off the train in the middle of the platform! Who wants to walk 3 blocks to the exit at East 86 Street? Clearly, there should be a shuttle loop train that runs within the 86 Street mezzanine level that makes a stop at East 83 Street, East 84 Street, East 85 Street, and East 86 Street so that the leery don’t have to suffer from a panic attack walking a few blocks through the huge cavern.

Edited by CenSin
Maps for comparison
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

If you can somehow do a moving walkway it would work, but there are people (especially late at night) who would be leery of using that to get from Bowling Green to Whitehall/South Ferry who now prefer to likely take the (1) to SF just because it actually goes there.

And the big question is: what happens after they get to their destination? It’s night time. Do they wait until the sun comes up to leave the confines of station? Is South Ferry some especially dangerous zone that warrants special treatment at great expense?

Edited by CenSin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got a rather complex proposal. I bread it into parts. 

Step 1. Rebuild the 149 Street Junction by having the southbound (5) curve under 149-Grand concourse. And the north bound side completely avoid the Station. The tracks connect with the (2) a few Kilometers west from 3 Avenue - 149 Street.

(Optional) Expand 3 Avenue 149 Street and do a Church Avenue-Ditmas Avenue like track set up  (minus the Yard) 

Step 2. Create a new grade seperation between 135 Street and 145 Street on the (2) and (3) where the (2) separates from the (3) . By doing so, the 145 Street platforms can finally be extended south , making 148 Street redundant

(Optional) build 2 new X Switches south of 149 Street - Grand Concourse to short turn trains on the (4) train platform. 

So what do you all think??

Edited by LGA Link N train
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, CenSin said:

And the big question is: what happens after they get to their destination? It’s night time. Do they wait until the sun comes up to leave the confines of station? Is South Ferry some especially dangerous zone that warrants special treatment at great expense?

I saw the other posts and you make a point.  The lengths are quite short.

That said, I would still do the shuttle because the idea is the Shuttle would be a weekday-only operation while evenings, nights and weekends, the (6) would run there as would the (5) when NOT running to Brooklyn.  Main thing it would do is eliminate fumigating at Bowling Green plus at the same time increase service in lower Manhattan during off hours to an area that has seen its residential popular grow many times-fold since the original shuttle ended in 1977. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Wallyhorse said:

That said, I would still do the shuttle because the idea is the Shuttle would be a weekday-only operation

But that’s a non-answer… why does it have to run at all? The South Ferry loop cannot be extended to accommodate 10-car trains, and using the platform would require special procedures maintained only for the sake of using that platform.

Edited by CenSin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that I look at the maps, I have other things to say.

Building a connection between Bowling Green and Whitehall is really short. But such transfers are already available at Fulton (out of system) and at Canal (in system). A BG-Whitehall connection would also not end up being the shortest path to South Ferry itself from BG and could potentially be confusing for customers.

Really the big miss was the lack of a paid connection with Dey. IIRC that was in the original scope but was cut out for budget reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

That said, I would still do the shuttle because the idea is the Shuttle would be a weekday-only operation while evenings, nights and weekends, the (6) would run there as would the (5) when NOT running to Brooklyn.  Main thing it would do is eliminate fumigating at Bowling Green plus at the same time increase service in lower Manhattan during off hours to an area that has seen its residential popular grow many times-fold since the original shuttle ended in 1977. 

Do you understand the operational limitations of doing this? What is to be gained by sending the weekend (5) and (6) to a station which can only platform five cars (and is not easily extendable), and can only platform one door of each of these five cars? Why are we creating a chokepoint at Brooklyn Bridge by forcing the (6) to merge with the (4) and (5)?

And why create a useless (S) from Bowling Green to South Ferry? In the time that it takes to cross under the (4)(5) tracks, walk up to the (S) platform, wait for the train, have the (S) creep around the curves, stop at South Ferry using one door per car, and walk to the exit at South Ferry, you could have just used a moving walkway. Or, for that matter, probably an un-moving walkway would suffice as well.

You could eliminate fumigation on the weekend (5) by simply operating it the same way the (6) does around Brooklyn Bridge, without fooling around with the old inner loop.

Some tracks in the subway are disused, and they are meant to be. There is no imperative to reopen every single meter of closed track just for the sake of it.

Edited by officiallyliam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wally. I've walked from Whitehall to Bowling Green before, and it's a just a couple hundred inches away. It's literally Jay St-MetroTech distance. What's the point of restoring a shuttle if you can just walk instead?

Just because the loops are unused does not mean we have to use them. You don't even gain operational benefit from doing this- you only create yet another chokepoint in place of the Bowling Green fumigation. And as mentioned earlier, the platforms can't be extended. Also, I don't think that the SF loops will have capacity for BOTH the (5) and (6). You've now created not just a chokepoint at Brooklyn Bridge, but also ANOTHER another conga line in the loops. 

And also, who would demand for service off-hours? We already have several toppings of spaghetti serving the Financial District, and the (1)(4)(5)(R)(W) do fine when they handle their respective stations. There will zero to no demand for this, and even if there was, (4)(5) service would simply be increased. More people will demand for the RBB more than terminating the (5)(6) at old SF. 

The answer is simple: Build a transfer/moving walkway. Period. This proposal is so hackneyed when it could instead be replaced with ONE SIMPLE TRANSFER. It's overcomplicated for absolutely no reason. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Coney Island Av said:

Wally. I've walked from Whitehall to Bowling Green before, and it's a just a couple hundred inches away. It's literally Jay St-MetroTech distance. What's the point of restoring a shuttle if you can just walk instead?

Just because the loops are unused does not mean we have to use them. You don't even gain operational benefit from doing this- you only create yet another chokepoint in place of the Bowling Green fumigation. And as mentioned earlier, the platforms can't be extended. Also, I don't think that the SF loops will have capacity for BOTH the (5) and (6). You've now created not just a chokepoint at Brooklyn Bridge, but also ANOTHER another conga line in the loops. 

And also, who would demand for service off-hours? We already have several toppings of spaghetti serving the Financial District, and the (1)(4)(5)(R)(W) do fine when they handle their respective stations. There will zero to no demand for this, and even if there was, (4)(5) service would simply be increased. More people will demand for the RBB more than terminating the (5)(6) at old SF. 

The answer is simple: Build a transfer/moving walkway. Period. This proposal is so hackneyed when it could instead be replaced with ONE SIMPLE TRANSFER. It's overcomplicated for absolutely no reason. 

If you CAN do the transfer between the (1)(R)(W) and (4) and (5), then yes.  Points taken on bringing back the shuttle, I was thinking in terms of what I used to have to deal with in my job where some people didn't want to walk outside (especially at night) for even a block or two because they were fearful of being a crime victim in some cases. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Extending the (N) and (W) 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) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

If you CAN do the transfer between the (1)(R)(W) and (4) and (5), then yes.  Points taken on bringing back the shuttle, I was thinking in terms of what I used to have to deal with in my job where some people didn't want to walk outside (especially at night) for even a block or two because they were fearful of being a crime victim in some cases. 

Hence, my follow-up here:

On 4/7/2018 at 11:27 AM, CenSin said:

And the big question is: what happens after they get to their destination? It’s night time. Do they wait until the sun comes up to leave the confines of station? Is South Ferry some especially dangerous zone that warrants special treatment at great expense?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LGA Link N train said:

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

Extending the (N) and (W) 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) 

If we're stuck with the LGA AirTrain as proposed, it should be extended to Astoria Blvd to meet the (N). No need to extend the Astoria line to have it stub-end in the middle of nowhere.

Also, any Astoria line extension should really run along Ditmars, stopping at Steinway, Hazen, and 81st. Yes, there might be more opposition, but modern elevated trains are far sleeker and quieter than the ones we know (think AirTrain-style, or the Hong Kong MTR) and you'll be serving far more people than if you run all the way up to 20th Avenue. From there, the extended line could carry on to the airport, or run via Astoria Blvd either to the LIE (as per the Second System plans) or possibly up to northern Flushing or College Point.

Edited by officiallyliam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, officiallyliam said:

If we're stuck with the LGA AirTrain as proposed, it should be extended to Astoria Blvd to meet the (N). No need to extend the Astoria line to have it stub-end in a residential area.

On the bright side. It reaches the marine terminal and a yard would be built in my plan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, LGA Link N train said:

On the bright side. It reaches the marine terminal and a yard would be built in my plan

It doesn't serve the Marine Air Terminal at all. From your proposed terminus at 21st Avenue and 81st Street to the terminal is a 12 minute walk during which you have to go down to Ditmars and back up. And presumably, the MAT would be better covered anyway by a stop on the AirTrain anyway.

If it's needed, the yard can be built without this extension, or with a Ditmars extension. Though, with 36th Street Yard being at least partially converted for passenger service in the near future, I'm not sure how necessary an Astoria yard is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, officiallyliam said:

If we're stuck with the LGA AirTrain as proposed, it should be extended to Astoria Blvd to meet the (N). No need to extend the Astoria line to have it stub-end in the middle of nowhere.

Also, any Astoria line extension should really run along Ditmars, stopping at Steinway, Hazen, and 81st. Yes, there might be more opposition, but modern elevated trains are far sleeker and quieter than the ones we know (think AirTrain-style, or the Hong Kong MTR) and you'll be serving far more people than if you run all the way up to 20th Avenue. From there, the extended line could carry on to the airport, or run via Astoria Blvd either to the LIE (as per the Second System plans) or possibly up to northern Flushing or College Point.

The problem is whether having it curve onto Ditmars will be feasible. At least one building will have to demolished because it'll be similar to the curve between Cypress Hills and Crescent St on the (J)

For me personally, I would have the routing via 19 Av with no stops so the yard could be built, and there would be less opposition. Cuomo's dumb AirTrain is useless and only forces riders to keep transferring. I would also extend to the actual airport itself, since that's the whole purpose of this extension. There will be provisions to have the line be extended further east to Flushing or Bayside. 

And also, LGA will be rebuilt to have all the terminals in one sport as opposed to being spread out. But either way, we could run the (R) to Astoria/LGA, which would replace the (N)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, officiallyliam said:

It doesn't serve the Marine Air Terminal at all. From your proposed terminus at 21st Avenue and 81st Street to the terminal is a 12 minute walk during which you have to go down to Ditmars and back up. And presumably, the MAT would be better covered anyway by a stop on the AirTrain anyway.

If it's needed, the yard can be built without this extension, or with a Ditmars extension. Though, with 36th Street Yard being at least partially converted for passenger service in the near future, I'm not sure how necessary an Astoria yard is.

And I still think it would be better to extend the (N) to The Bronx with a new station around 20th Avenue before going over a bridge to The Bronx, with the first stop an elevated one at Food Service Drive before going underground and ending at a terminal at Jacobi Medical Center, including transfers at East 180th for the (2) & (5) and Westchester-Elder Avenues for the (6).  It would give Bronx riders an option to get to Queens without going through Manhattan and would be very handy, especially when Dyre service is cut back to a shuttle.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Wallyhorse said:

And I still think it would be better to extend the (N) to The Bronx with a new station around 20th Avenue before going over a bridge to The Bronx, with the first stop an elevated one at Food Service Drive before going underground and ending at a terminal at Jacobi Medical Center, including transfers at East 180th for the (2) & (5) and Westchester-Elder Avenues for the (6).  It would give Bronx riders an option to get to Queens without going through Manhattan and would be very handy, especially when Dyre service is cut back to a shuttle.  

If we're going to improve transportation between the Bronx and Queens, let's build the Triboro Rx - from Astoria, over the Hell Gate, through the Port Morris Branch (connecting to the (6)), then a short tunnel under 149th to hit the (2) and (5).

We can improve mobility between Queens and the Bronx without a three-mile bridge over the Sound, and extend the Astoria line easily to serve transit deserts in northern Queens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

And I still think it would be better to extend the (N) to The Bronx with a new station around 20th Avenue before going over a bridge to The Bronx, with the first stop an elevated one at Food Service Drive before going underground and ending at a terminal at Jacobi Medical Center, including transfers at East 180th for the (2) & (5) and Westchester-Elder Avenues for the (6).  It would give Bronx riders an option to get to Queens without going through Manhattan and would be very handy, especially when Dyre service is cut back to a shuttle.  

Because clearly, Bronx-Queens is a larger market than Manhattan-LGA.

 

/s

Edited by CenSin
Added an /s for good measure.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/7/2018 at 12:13 PM, Wallyhorse said:

That said, I would still do the shuttle because the idea is the Shuttle would be a weekday-only operation while evenings, nights and weekends, the (6) would run there as would the (5) when NOT running to Brooklyn.  Main thing it would do is eliminate fumigating at Bowling Green plus at the same time increase service in lower Manhattan during off hours to an area that has seen its residential popular grow many times-fold since the original shuttle ended in 1977. 

That's insane.

Why have a shuttle, which costs a lot of money to build, maintain, and operate, which has a weird and complex service pattern with the possibility of causing delays, when you can just have a pedestrian tunnel which is functional 24/7 365 days a year. The train would only be able to get their maybe 90 seconds faster on a good run considering the curves and switches that it would need to traverse, not to mention the time spent waiting in the station for it to come.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, LGA Link N train said:

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

Extending the (N) and (W) 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) 

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.