Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[bobtehpanda]

8 hours ago, Union Tpke said:

I have heard that because that area was landfill, groundwater could be a major issue.

Groundwater is a major issue all over this area. Most of what is today's New York was built on top of landfill, wetlands, and lots of streams and springs. Which is not that different from most major cities around the world.

If a place like Bangkok or Mumbai which has literal monsoon seasons can build an underground tunnel, or Amsterdam which is mostly below sea level, I'm sure that New York will be fine.

[R68OnBroadway]

Here's an idea I have that could help de-interline QBL while providing relief to Astoria (feel free to give thoughts).

 WTC- Jamaica-179th via 8th, 53rd and QBL and Hillside local

 express east of Forest Hills

 unchanged

 Jamaica Center-Coney Island via QBL express, 63rd, Broadway express, bridge, 4th express and Sea Beach 

 unchanged

 Astoria-Bay Ridge

 eliminated or rerouted to New Utrecht (a platform could be built over the SB express track to terminate trains

A new passageway would also be built between Lex 63rd and Lex 59th.

Please note that is proposal isn't something I would advocate greatly for given the interlining but is really a proposal just thrown out there.

[engineerboy6561]

3 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said:

Here's an idea I have that could help de-interline QBL while providing relief to Astoria (feel free to give thoughts).

 WTC- Jamaica-179th via 8th, 53rd and QBL and Hillside local

 express east of Forest Hills

 unchanged

 Jamaica Center-Coney Island via QBL express, 63rd, Broadway express, bridge, 4th express and Sea Beach 

 unchanged

 Astoria-Bay Ridge

 eliminated or rerouted to New Utrecht (a platform could be built over the SB express track to terminate trains

A new passageway would also be built between Lex 63rd and Lex 59th.

Please note that is proposal isn't something I would advocate greatly for given the interlining but is really a proposal just thrown out there.

I believe the specific issue with that is that an Astoria-Bay Ridge line would have no yard of its own, and so all trains would have to deadhead, either from CI Yard via Sea Beach and then across a currently nonexistent crossover on the 4 Av express tracks to reverse, or via QBL with a reverse move in the 59 St tubes across another currently nonexistent crossover.

Extending the  to New Utrecht means adding a merge on 4 Av between the  and  that may actually be a potential source of delays, and if you get rid of it then there may be local TPH issues. It's not a bad idea but we'd need an Astoria Yard to make it work.

[R68OnBroadway]

3 minutes ago, engineerboy6561 said:

I believe the specific issue with that is that an Astoria-Bay Ridge line would have no yard of its own, and so all trains would have to deadhead, either from CI Yard via Sea Beach and then across a currently nonexistent crossover on the 4 Av express tracks to reverse, or via QBL with a reverse move in the 59 St tubes across another currently nonexistent crossover.

Extending the  to New Utrecht means adding a merge on 4 Av between the  and  that may actually be a potential source of delays, and if you get rid of it then there may be local TPH issues. It's not a bad idea but we'd need an Astoria Yard to make it work.

When I said New Utrecht I meant the  platforms (not the  platforms); thinking back at that though it could make more sense to terminate the  at Bay Parkway or 86th to have extra room to layup trains.

[RR503]

The yard issue is overblown. For years, we operated 15-18tph of Astoria service to/from Bay Ridge, using CIY and the assortment of spurs/express tracks along the route to hold trains. Wasn't perfect, but it worked. 

[engineerboy6561]

2 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said:

When I said New Utrecht I meant the  platforms (not the  platforms); thinking back at that though it could make more sense to terminate the  at Bay Parkway or 86th to have extra room to layup trains.

That could work if you rebuild New Utrecht to an express station and turn trains on the central two tracks, but you're still adding a merge at 59 St that becomes annoying.

 

 

[bobtehpanda]

1 hour ago, RR503 said:

The yard issue is overblown. For years, we operated 15-18tph of Astoria service to/from Bay Ridge, using CIY and the assortment of spurs/express tracks along the route to hold trains. Wasn't perfect, but it worked. 

Wasn't there also a plan to convert 36th St to hold revenue trains? 36th is quite close to Fourth Avenue, and even if you wouldn't use that you could free up some space at closer yards.

[RR503]

10 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

Wasn't there also a plan to convert 36th St to hold revenue trains? 36th is quite close to Fourth Avenue, and even if you wouldn't use that you could free up some space at closer yards.

Yes. It’s always in the twenty year needs, was in SAS EIS, and sometimes even makes the capital program...but alas, no progress. That’s a simple improvement that really, really should be done. 

[KK 6 Ave Local]

Here's a plan:

SAS 2 tracks to do the  a favor

 from Gun Hill Road to 125, 3 tracks in the Bronx, then to Lower Manhattan and Atlantic Ave Superexpress

(teal) from Rockaway Park up the RBB and on LIRR tracks (and the  will run there too to JFK) and then  down 2 Av, Chrystie Street, and the Jamaica Line to Archer Ave

Others:

 along Fulton Local

 to Bay Ridge and  to Staten Island

 from Middle Village extended to Jackson Heights

and the  along 125

 and  swap in Queens so Queens Blvd has  express and  local

And that's it.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

On 3/13/2019 at 11:00 PM, RR503 said:

Yes. It’s always in the twenty year needs, was in SAS EIS, and sometimes even makes the capital program...but alas, no progress. That’s a simple improvement that really, really should be done. 

Agreed in full. MTA really needs to shit or get off the pot on this one. That extra revenue space will go a long way. MTA, just get it done and quit it with the excuses!

On 3/14/2019 at 7:55 PM, KK 6 Ave Local said:

Here's a plan:

SAS 2 tracks to do the  a favor

 from Gun Hill Road to 125, 3 tracks in the Bronx, then to Lower Manhattan and Atlantic Ave Superexpress

(teal) from Rockaway Park up the RBB and on LIRR tracks (and the  will run there too to JFK) and then  down 2 Av, Chrystie Street, and the Jamaica Line to Archer Ave

Others:

 along Fulton Local

 to Bay Ridge and  to Staten Island

 from Middle Village extended to Jackson Heights

and the  along 125

 and  swap in Queens so Queens Blvd has  express and  local

And that's it.

Does the  go via the 60th or 63rd Street Tunnel in your plan? I’m assuming 60th because you’ve got the teal Z running down 2nd Ave to Chrystie St. But then, you still have to have the  switching to the local tracks to get to 60th, so you’d still have merging delays on the Broadway line.

Edited March 16, 2019 by T to Dyre Avenue

[BreeddekalbL]

Making Woodhaven into an  express station,

To make sure 63rd DR and 67th do not lose service, I will add a switch to express track going WB after 63rd drive, and before grand ave newtown

and going EB the switches will be going after Grand ave and before 63rd DR

[Bay Ridge Express]

Wouldn't making Woodhaven express crowd the express trains even more?

[LGA Link N Train]

8 minutes ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

Wouldn't making Woodhaven express crowd the express trains even more?

In a way, yes. But it would also take crowds off Roosevelt and Forest Hills. 

[RR503]

45 minutes ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

Wouldn't making Woodhaven express crowd the express trains even more?

Yeah, there'll be some pax for who the marginal gain in time will swing the ball between express and staying on the local, but that impact would be easily ameliorated by the more even dwell times that this'd provide. Really what needs to be done is deinterlining -- that'd separate the locals from expresses on a destinational level, which means more even crowding. 

[KK 6 Ave Local]

On 3/16/2019 at 10:24 AM, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Agreed in full. MTA really needs to shit or get off the pot on this one. That extra revenue space will go a long way. MTA, just get it done and quit it with the excuses!

Does the  go via the 60th or 63rd Street Tunnel in your plan? I’m assuming 60th because you’ve got the teal Z running down 2nd Ave to Chrystie St. But then, you still have to have the  switching to the local tracks to get to 60th, so you’d still have merging delays on the Broadway line.

Yeah it would be 60th because I really can't make it perfect, QBL screwed itself up tbh

[KK 6 Ave Local]

Here's another plan-

 is Gun Hill Road to 125 again, then along Atlantic Ave (again), but with more stops than the LIRR Atlantic Branch like Woodhaven. teal stays the same but truncated to Atlantic Ave  and possibly renamed to teal because K comes after J, Z is way off. Probably some method to fix the QBL like de-interlining it, as well as DeKalb. Also the  runs cross-Bronx and the  to Fulton Local.

[LGA Link N Train]

I thought of an idea that would Restructure Weekend Subway Service as a part of Deinterlining Broadway.

 service would Run from Ditmars to Bay Ridge with some trains short turning at 9th Avenue.  service remains suspended on Weekends. 

 service would Terminate at Queens Plaza or Forest Hills instead of Essex or 96th. 

 and/or  service would be local in Queens. (I would choose the  since it’s a shorter route compared to the ) 

 trains would be rerouted to 96th Street and run Express in Manhattan. 

This one has potential to make a certain Transfer more convenient for most: 

 trains get a one stop extension to Queens Plaza in order to make transferring to the  and  much easier. 

Any thoughts? 

[Maxwell179]

4 hours ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

I thought of an idea that would Restructure Weekend Subway Service as a part of Deinterlining Broadway.

 service would Run from Ditmars to Bay Ridge with some trains short turning at 9th Avenue.  service remains suspended on Weekends. 

 service would Terminate at Queens Plaza or Forest Hills instead of Essex or 96th. 

 and/or  service would be local in Queens. (I would choose the  since it’s a shorter route compared to the ) 

 trains would be rerouted to 96th Street and run Express in Manhattan. 

This one has potential to make a certain Transfer more convenient for most: 

 trains get a one stop extension to Queens Plaza in order to make transferring to the  and  much easier. 

Any thoughts? 

 

Edited March 17, 2019 by Maxwell179

[KK 6 Ave Local]

Should we run 2 ave trains to the Jamaica Line, or will that mess something up? I'm thinking this is the best option for Brooklyn SAS traffic.

[bobtehpanda]

16 minutes ago, KK 6 Ave Local said:

Should we run 2 ave trains to the Jamaica Line, or will that mess something up? I'm thinking this is the best option for Brooklyn SAS traffic.

We already have the and running across the bridge. There's only two tracks east of Broadway Junction. Where is there room?

[KK 6 Ave Local]

4 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

We already have the and running across the bridge. There's only two tracks east of Broadway Junction. Where is there room?

True dat.

So I'd probably have  trains run Fulton Local to Euclid, or have  express and  local but merging would break it.

[LGA Link N Train]

1 hour ago, KK 6 Ave Local said:

True dat.

So I'd probably have  trains run Fulton Local to Euclid, or have  express and  local but merging would break it.

You can do that. But that would limit capacity for all services on Fulton Street, making it no better than current day services.

What this proposal and your SAS-Jamaica/WillyB Proposals seem to lack are good connections with other subway lines. Especially the West Side  and  lines. If anything, here’s what you can do to better use SAS capacity: 

South of Houston Street, your  and  can replace the  and  trains in Brooklyn. This way, the Second Avenue Subway can have better transit Connections with other transit lines. In this case, your  and  would be able to connect to  And  lines. (And the Franklin  too) This in turn would force you to go with one of 2 options. Send the  and  either to Williamsburg or Culver. Both of which require Infrastructure Upgrades. 

72nd Street can gain an additional Lower Level to have trains terminate or continue north. That going to be up to you to decide if you want to send the  up north or have it terminate at a 72nd LL and have the  continue North. 

Fulton Local capacity can be increased a bit faster if we build a tunnel to Connect Whitehall with the Transit Museum. This way, you can send  and/or  trains down Fulton local which would better connect the IND/BMT with one another. This would be convenient for the  and  as well. As an additional option, you can create a Nassau/4th Avenue Service. This can be the ,  or some other service. 

 

Please note that that all of these proposals have been discussed before and have their own sets of downsides to them. These are jus my thoughts. 

[KK 6 Ave Local]

On 3/17/2019 at 10:27 PM, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

You can do that. But that would limit capacity for all services on Fulton Street, making it no better than current day services.

What this proposal and your SAS-Jamaica/WillyB Proposals seem to lack are good connections with other subway lines. Especially the West Side  and  lines. If anything, here’s what you can do to better use SAS capacity: 

South of Houston Street, your  and  can replace the  and  trains in Brooklyn. This way, the Second Avenue Subway can have better transit Connections with other transit lines. In this case, your  and  would be able to connect to  And  lines. (And the Franklin  too) This in turn would force you to go with one of 2 options. Send the  and  either to Williamsburg or Culver. Both of which require Infrastructure Upgrades. 

72nd Street can gain an additional Lower Level to have trains terminate or continue north. That going to be up to you to decide if you want to send the  up north or have it terminate at a 72nd LL and have the  continue North. 

Fulton Local capacity can be increased a bit faster if we build a tunnel to Connect Whitehall with the Transit Museum. This way, you can send  and/or  trains down Fulton local which would better connect the IND/BMT with one another. This would be convenient for the  and  as well. As an additional option, you can create a Nassau/4th Avenue Service. This can be the ,  or some other service. 

 

Please note that that all of these proposals have been discussed before and have their own sets of downsides to them. These are jus my thoughts. 

That does make sense. And if we de-interline DeKalb Avenue, then both trains can run down Brighton, and give it a new set of connections.

The  in Queens could either run on a new Northern Blvd subway, or replace the  on Queens Blvd.

[KK 6 Ave Local]

I have a cost-effective plan that builds relatively no new subway besides 2 Avenue.

 on SAS,  to Bway-125 and  to around Douglaston on the LIRR by using the Bypass and then Port Washington. Does not serve as much as a Northern Blvd subway would, but it can relieve the . 

 will run on Bypass too to 212th Street, minor inconvenience as all 63rd Street trains will be running to the Bypass, but that was the original plan so why not.  will run Express on Queens Blvd, effectively de-interlining it, to 179th Street.  remain unchanged.

DeKalb is de-interlined, but Broadway cannot be as  being removed from QBL will necessitate  service there, bringing a host of new problems.  service CAN be moved to SAS but this would strain the , especially after a one-stop extension to LGA.   will run to the Sea Beach and Brighton Line, moving the  to Culver and the  to Staten Island, and  will go to Euclid.

 

And there's my essay.

Actually this means the Manhattan Bridge (North tracks, was it?) will have 3 trains on them so might have to revise.

Edited March 19, 2019 by KK 6 Ave Local

[ibroketheprinter]

Crazy idea, eliminate A division and rework all stations to at least be up to B division and upgrade tech so that trains can go 60+ on express runs

 

=