Around the Horn Posted March 18, 2020 Share #8751 Posted March 18, 2020 8 hours ago, RR503 said: Now, for some fun. I finally made maps of my various deinterlining ideas. Today's service https://drive.google.com/open?id=1HHNa2XqlrDKPIKUzpTJcyQbSndtbs1cM What I'd do without spending any capital $$$ https://drive.google.com/open?id=1yZcwJfjcO1tfYuttqW2lUuatAFvIaxuz What I'd do with capital $$$ https://drive.google.com/open?id=15z4fvc1cfxxtY_ZhUbFex3jxgT0dt3lm The general principles here are to minimize merges/maximize capacity while trying to preserve a maximum of important connectivity (so we deinterline CPW, but not Essex or Bergen), and on the no-$$$ map to try to jump for deinterlinings that can largely be achieved through low-effort swaps, ie , , . Nothing on here will be all that unfamiliar to those of you who've been reading my ramblings for a while, but I thought it'd be nice to see it all on one map. A quick question about the Lenox in the last map, how would you turn it around at 135th without getting in the way of the ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted March 18, 2020 Share #8752 Posted March 18, 2020 Just now, Around the Horn said: A quick question about the Lenox in the last map, how would you turn it around at 135th without getting in the way of the ? You'd rebuild 135 -- move the s/b track to where the spur is, move the platform with it, and add a 3rd track alongside the western edge of the 135 sb plat for the shuttle. You'd have to build a bit of tunnel north to 142, but that should (?) be doable? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGA Link N Train Posted March 18, 2020 Share #8753 Posted March 18, 2020 27 minutes ago, RR503 said: You'd rebuild 135 -- move the s/b track to where the spur is, move the platform with it, and add a 3rd track alongside the western edge of the 135 sb plat for the shuttle. You'd have to build a bit of tunnel north to 142, but that should (?) be doable? Would a 135th Street Station conversion be done in Phases or no? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jova42R Posted March 18, 2020 Share #8754 Posted March 18, 2020 (edited) NEW LIRR OR MNRR LINE: Cross-City Line: underlined means limited service MAIN LINE: Grand Central via East Side Access Queensbridge new lower level station, limited service, then via LIRR Main Line Woodside Elmhurst (new station) Cross-City Line Triboro Branch no track connections with Triboro Branch, after this station via Rockaway Beach Branch South Forest Hills (Yellowstone Blvd) Union Tpke Forest Park (Myrtle Av) Woodhaven (Jamaica Av) Woodhaven Jct. (Atlantic Av) Cross-City Line Atlantic Branch full track junction with Atlantic Branch Ozone Park (Liberty Av) Howard Beach - JFK most trains terminate here, select trains continue to Rockaway Park Broad Channel all stops to Beach 116 St Beach 116 St TRIBORO BRANCH: ENTIRE LINE on Bay Ridge Branch and Fremont Sub/NE Corridor Brooklyn Army Terminal Bensonhurst (New Utrecht Av) Mapleton (McDonald Av) Midwood (E 16 St) Brooklyn College East Flatbush (Utica Av) Canarsie (Remsen Av) East New York Cross-City Line Atlantic Branch Bushwick (Wilson Av) Ridgewood (Myrtle Av) Middle Village Elmhurst South (57 Av) Elmhurst Cross-City Line Main Line Jackson Heights Woodside North (31 Av) Astoria East (45 St) Astoria Randalls Island Port Morris line continues on as East Bronx Branch and West Bronx Branch ATLANTIC BRANCH: ENTIRE LINE on LIRR Atlantic Branch Atlantic Terminal Nostrand Av East New York Cross-City Line Triboro Branch Woodhaven Jct. Cross-City Line Main Line Jamaica WEST BRONX BRANCH: line comes from Brooklyn as Triboro Branch Port Morris via Oak Point Link 149 St - The Hub & Harlem Highbridge (Depot Pl) via MNRR Hudson Line Morris Heights University Heights Marble Hill Spuyten Duyvil Riverdale Cross-City Line West Side Branch some trains terminate on the side track at Riverdale, some trains terminate on the NB local track. EAST BRONX BRANCH: line comes from Brooklyn as Triboro Branch Port Morris via NE Corridor Hunts Point (Hunts Point Av) Soundview (177 St) Parkchester (White Plains Rd) Morris Park - Yeshiva University Co-Op City - Palmer Av terminates on a new track at Co-Op City. WEST SIDE BRANCH: Riverdale Cross-City Line West Bronx Branch via Amtrak West Side Line Inwood (Dyckman St) Washington Heights (181 St) Hamilton Heights (158 St) West Harlem (125 St) Upper West Side (96 St) Riverside South (70 St) Hells Kitchen (49 St) Penn Station Thoughts @RR503 @bobtehpanda @Union Tpke? Edited March 18, 2020 by Jova42R 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Around the Horn Posted March 18, 2020 Share #8755 Posted March 18, 2020 1 hour ago, RR503 said: You'd rebuild 135 -- move the s/b track to where the spur is, move the platform with it, and add a 3rd track alongside the western edge of the 135 sb plat for the shuttle. You'd have to build a bit of tunnel north to 142, but that should (?) be doable? Sounds good to me... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lex Posted March 18, 2020 Share #8756 Posted March 18, 2020 14 minutes ago, RR503 said: You'd rebuild 135 -- move the s/b track to where the spur is, move the platform with it, and add a 3rd track alongside the western edge of the 135 sb plat for the shuttle. You'd have to build a bit of tunnel north to 142, but that should (?) be doable? But why bother doing it if the buses can fill the gap fairly easily? Either have through-run service or get rid of it entirely, but this will do no one any favors, especially since it fails to address any of the factors that keep the others around. Speaking of questionable investments, why bother building a northbound flyover for Dyre Avenue if the express service starts/ends in Wakefield? Last I checked, there are switches north of where the existing southbound flyover joins, and your (investment) plan calls for night service to/from Manhattan on both branches. (If it's actually a mistake, then I won't force the issue, but if it's not, then I'll need a good explanation.) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted March 18, 2020 Share #8757 Posted March 18, 2020 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Lex said: But why bother doing it if the buses can fill the gap fairly easily? Either have through-run service or get rid of it entirely, but this will do no one any favors, especially since it fails to address any of the factors that keep the others around. You need to preserve rail up there for yard access — you're going to need that put in capacity if you want to deinterline Nostrand without blowing your ops budget. If you’re going to have rail up there, you may as well have a shuttle. It’s not perfect by any standard, but it’s politically better than nothing, and should be relatively cheap to operate. 14 minutes ago, Lex said: Speaking of questionable investments, why bother building a northbound flyover for Dyre Avenue if the express service starts/ends in Wakefield? Last I checked, there are switches north of where the existing southbound flyover joins, and your (investment) plan calls for night service to/from Manhattan on both branches. (If it's actually a mistake, then I won't force the issue, but if it's not, then I'll need a good explanation.) A mistake — cut the flyovers. As you can tell, this went through many iterations before I was happy with it; originally I had express and local, but decided that it’d likely be mighty difficult to justify such a significant investment when a zero cost alternative that had the same operational impact existed. I’m very open to arguments the other way, but that was my reasoning. Edited March 18, 2020 by RR503 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted March 18, 2020 Share #8758 Posted March 18, 2020 22 hours ago, RR503 said: It would, and in a perfect world I'd do just that. But I was trying to keep the list of things there to things I could actually see happening, so Burnside switches it is! (Also, demand growth in the Bronx is concentrated in the southern portion of the borough. Don't know if we necessarily want to be running 30tph+ that far north) Understood. Increases on corridors like this would go great with upzoning. 23 hours ago, RR503 said: I'd prefer to see the given that the is already a bit of a mess, but given the blowback experienced on a certain pilot because we were replacing 10 cars with 8, I figured that may be a price worth paying. It's not a decision I have any strong feelings about, though. You could work it like that, but there's also a capacity problem. Both the and run 10tph peak into Manhattan from Brooklyn -- you can't merge those both into Astoria with current terminal infrastructure. You could run more 96 St s, but then it becomes harder to manage yards. There's a similar issue with Queens, the 's 10tph can't all turn at Whitehall, so you're either stuck with an ugly mainline discharge at Canal or an extension to Brooklyn, at which point we're basically back where we're started. The nice thing about the is it's a low frequency overlay that's easily adjustable into capacity gaps. I think it's best we keep it that way, and if we're really worried about the 's length, extend the instead. Even managing to terminate a few trains at Canal Street could help a bit. How many do you think could be terminated there without screwing up service? 17 hours ago, RR503 said: You could, but again, I'm aiming for investments that could concievably get done by the MTA in this day and age. I also am still somewhat unconvinced that this specific project should be a priority -- it'd be $$$ for a nontrivial operations gain, but only a small capacity gain. If you reconfigured it a bit (ie abandoned 4 tk and used M and 3 only) you could probably extend the western island. Then you'd just need to signal it properly... It's something I'd like to see looked at, though only if it's found that CBTC cannot fix the curve issue. Agreed, but the map is aspirational. How many TPH do you think could terminate at City Hall LL? 14 hours ago, RR503 said: You'd rebuild 135 -- move the s/b track to where the spur is, move the platform with it, and add a 3rd track alongside the western edge of the 135 sb plat for the shuttle. You'd have to build a bit of tunnel north to 142, but that should (?) be doable? Wouldn't it make more sense to have the shuttle track be in the middle so riders heading to 145th or 148th can get an easy cross-platform transfer from trains heading uptown? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R10 2952 Posted March 18, 2020 Share #8759 Posted March 18, 2020 Regarding BMT City Hall's lower level, I've always wondered about it myself- didn't some BMT Broadway trains go in and out of service at Canal Street in the '90s? Used to see trains laid up on the center tracks between the two stations all the time back in 1999-2000. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted March 19, 2020 Share #8760 Posted March 19, 2020 7 hours ago, Union Tpke said: Even managing to terminate a few trains at Canal Street could help a bit. How many do you think could be terminated there without screwing up service? Maybe a 3-4 per hour? But even then isn't good -- the second you start turning trains there, you're going to cause irregular gaps in through-running service unless you're efficient. Which they aren't. 7 hours ago, Union Tpke said: Agreed, but the map is aspirational. How many TPH do you think could terminate at City Hall LL? There's aspirational and then there's ~aspirational~ though, and given that I'm not convinced of that project's relative merit... A stub end terminal with meh crossover placement? With CBTC, idk, 18tph? Which is more than you'd ever need. 7 hours ago, Union Tpke said: Wouldn't it make more sense to have the shuttle track be in the middle so riders heading to 145th or 148th can get an easy cross-platform transfer from trains heading uptown? Would be nice, but that means grade separating the junction. Don't think that's an easily justifiable investment. 5 hours ago, R10 2952 said: Regarding BMT City Hall's lower level, I've always wondered about it myself- didn't some BMT Broadway trains go in and out of service at Canal Street in the '90s? Used to see trains laid up on the center tracks between the two stations all the time back in 1999-2000. Up until spring 2018, there were s that entered service at Canal/Tunnel at 7:55 and 17:24. I don't _believe_ we schedule trains to lay up there outside supplements anymore (though don't quote me on that, I'm just skimming schedules and there may be deadheads from DIT), but it's certainly a known move for the agency. In years past, you're right that there were even more such trains -- in 1991, 4 s and some number of s entered service there for the AM rush. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jova42R Posted March 19, 2020 Share #8761 Posted March 19, 2020 22 hours ago, Jova42R said: NEW LIRR OR MNRR LINE: Cross-City Line: underlined means limited service MAIN LINE: Grand Central via East Side Access Queensbridge new lower level station, limited service, then via LIRR Main Line Woodside Elmhurst (new station) Cross-City Line Triboro Branch no track connections with Triboro Branch, after this station via Rockaway Beach Branch South Forest Hills (Yellowstone Blvd) Union Tpke Forest Park (Myrtle Av) Woodhaven (Jamaica Av) Woodhaven Jct. (Atlantic Av) Cross-City Line Atlantic Branch full track junction with Atlantic Branch Ozone Park (Liberty Av) Howard Beach - JFK most trains terminate here, select trains continue to Rockaway Park Broad Channel all stops to Beach 116 St Beach 116 St TRIBORO BRANCH: ENTIRE LINE on Bay Ridge Branch and Fremont Sub/NE Corridor Brooklyn Army Terminal Bensonhurst (New Utrecht Av) Mapleton (McDonald Av) Midwood (E 16 St) Brooklyn College East Flatbush (Utica Av) Canarsie (Remsen Av) East New York Cross-City Line Atlantic Branch Bushwick (Wilson Av) Ridgewood (Myrtle Av) Middle Village Elmhurst South (57 Av) Elmhurst Cross-City Line Main Line Jackson Heights Woodside North (31 Av) Astoria East (45 St) Astoria Randalls Island Port Morris line continues on as East Bronx Branch and West Bronx Branch ATLANTIC BRANCH: ENTIRE LINE on LIRR Atlantic Branch Atlantic Terminal Nostrand Av East New York Cross-City Line Triboro Branch Woodhaven Jct. Cross-City Line Main Line Jamaica WEST BRONX BRANCH: line comes from Brooklyn as Triboro Branch Port Morris via Oak Point Link 149 St - The Hub & Harlem Highbridge (Depot Pl) via MNRR Hudson Line Morris Heights University Heights Marble Hill Spuyten Duyvil Riverdale Cross-City Line West Side Branch some trains terminate on the side track at Riverdale, some trains terminate on the NB local track. EAST BRONX BRANCH: line comes from Brooklyn as Triboro Branch Port Morris via NE Corridor Hunts Point (Hunts Point Av) Soundview (177 St) Parkchester (White Plains Rd) Morris Park - Yeshiva University Co-Op City - Palmer Av terminates on a new track at Co-Op City. WEST SIDE BRANCH: Riverdale Cross-City Line West Bronx Branch via Amtrak West Side Line Inwood (Dyckman St) Washington Heights (181 St) Hamilton Heights (158 St) West Harlem (125 St) Upper West Side (96 St) Riverside South (70 St) Hells Kitchen (49 St) Penn Station Thoughts @RR503 @bobtehpanda @Union Tpke? One note on the West Side Branch: The Spuyten Duyvil Bridge would be rebuilt, and all stations would be on sidings on both sides so Amtrak trains can pass through without quadruple-tracking the whole Freedom Tunnel (it would be double-tracked from 41 St south. Any thoughts @RR503 @Union Tpke @bobtehpanda? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted March 19, 2020 Share #8762 Posted March 19, 2020 1 hour ago, Jova42R said: One note on the West Side Branch: The Spuyten Duyvil Bridge would be rebuilt, and all stations would be on sidings on both sides so Amtrak trains can pass through without quadruple-tracking the whole Freedom Tunnel (it would be double-tracked from 41 St south. Any thoughts @RR503 @Union Tpke @bobtehpanda? I don't really care to be tagged. Reviving the Lower Montauk as some hotshot main line is a waste of time and money. The rest of this just seems like crayoning for the sake of crayoning. Who's supposed to ride this? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jova42R Posted March 19, 2020 Share #8763 Posted March 19, 2020 Just now, bobtehpanda said: I don't really care to be tagged. Reviving the Lower Montauk as some hotshot main line is a waste of time and money. The rest of this just seems like crayoning for the sake of crayoning. Who's supposed to ride this? Sorry for tagging. The Lower Montauk is NOT part of the Cross-City Line, however. I thought that it could be, but decided against it, for the reasons you mentioned here and earlier. I do think, however that with the right service patterns, you could easily have ridership. Thoughts on what service patterns? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted March 19, 2020 Share #8764 Posted March 19, 2020 10 hours ago, RR503 said: Maybe a 3-4 per hour? But even then isn't good -- the second you start turning trains there, you're going to cause irregular gaps in through-running service unless you're efficient. Which they aren't. There's aspirational and then there's ~aspirational~ though, and given that I'm not convinced of that project's relative merit... A stub end terminal with meh crossover placement? With CBTC, idk, 18tph? Which is more than you'd ever need. Would be nice, but that means grade separating the junction. Don't think that's an easily justifiable investment. Up until spring 2018, there were s that entered service at Canal/Tunnel at 7:55 and 17:24. I don't _believe_ we schedule trains to lay up there outside supplements anymore (though don't quote me on that, I'm just skimming schedules and there may be deadheads from DIT), but it's certainly a known move for the agency. In years past, you're right that there were even more such trains -- in 1991, 4 s and some number of s entered service there for the AM rush. In about 2014 or so I was on an that terminated at Canal Street. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R10 2952 Posted March 19, 2020 Share #8765 Posted March 19, 2020 (edited) 18 hours ago, RR503 said: Up until spring 2018, there were s that entered service at Canal/Tunnel at 7:55 and 17:24. I don't _believe_ we schedule trains to lay up there outside supplements anymore (though don't quote me on that, I'm just skimming schedules and there may be deadheads from DIT), but it's certainly a known move for the agency. In years past, you're right that there were even more such trains -- in 1991, 4 s and some number of s entered service there for the AM rush. 7 hours ago, Union Tpke said: In about 2014 or so I was on an that terminated at Canal Street. Yeah it would make sense, especially back in the late-'90s/early-'00s considering the bridge tracks were out- sending all trains through the tunnel with the during rush hour would've been a mess I suspect. Edited March 19, 2020 by R10 2952 confused canal-nassau w/ canal-broadway 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted March 19, 2020 Share #8766 Posted March 19, 2020 7 hours ago, Union Tpke said: In about 2014 or so I was on an that terminated at Canal Street. Yeah, they had some turn there when Montague was out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jova42R Posted March 19, 2020 Share #8767 Posted March 19, 2020 Rockaway Beach Branch / QBL Express / 63 St Express / 8 Av Local Under this plan, the is rerouted to go to 96th St at all times, and the runs local from on QBL. So, QBL would be: EXPRESS LOCAL Howard Beach-JFK terminates on the middle tracks, station rebuilt Liberty Av connection to Rockaway Blvd, via Rockaway Beach Branch after here Atlantic Av Jamaica Av connection to Woodhaven Blvd Myrtle Av - Forest Park Union Tpke Yellowstone Blvd - South Forest Hills Alderton St - Rego Park 62 Av/Austin St Woodhaven Blvd rebuilt as a fully express station Jackson Heights at the 36 St Junction, the connects with the lower level 63 St tracks, and runs express to Lex-63 Lex-63 merges with tracks, then a new station at 5 Av then, via a new tunnel under 63 St to: Central Park W connection to 59 St, merges with tracks, then makes all stops to 145 St. 145 St 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KK 6 Ave Local Posted March 19, 2020 Share #8768 Posted March 19, 2020 I think this would be the best service plan we could get out before 2050: from Fordham Road - Coney Island via 3rd Ave, 2nd Ave, Manhattan Bridge North tracks, Brighton Local from Jamaica 179th - Brighton Beach via Hillside, Bypass, 2nd Ave, MB North, Brighton Express service is diverted towards Williamsburg and service runs between Essex Street - Bay Ridge, rush hours a few trips make it to Atlantic Ave on the service now runs on fulton Local with going from Euclid Ave - LGA elevated is demolished from Bway Junction to Cypress Hills with a new elevated on Jamaica Ave, serving trains Other basic de-interlining measures at Dekalb, Rogers, 145th (a north terminal swap is also added here) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3F Posted March 19, 2020 Share #8769 Posted March 19, 2020 On 3/17/2020 at 8:07 PM, RR503 said: You could, but again, I'm aiming for investments that could concievably get done by the MTA in this day and age. I also am still somewhat unconvinced that this specific project should be a priority -- it'd be $$$ for a nontrivial operations gain, but only a small capacity gain. If you reconfigured it a bit (ie abandoned 4 tk and used M and 3 only) you could probably extend the western island. Then you'd just need to signal it properly... It's something I'd like to see looked at, though only if it's found that CBTC cannot fix the curve issue. What would be the maximum estimated capacity of the Broadway Line between City Hall and Cortlandt Street, with and without CBTC? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted March 19, 2020 Share #8770 Posted March 19, 2020 (edited) 2 minutes ago, P3F said: What would be the maximum estimated capacity of the Broadway Line between City Hall and Cortlandt Street, with and without CBTC? Without CBTC 21 TPH. If done right, 30 TPH should be possible with CBTC. Edited March 19, 2020 by Union Tpke 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted March 19, 2020 Share #8771 Posted March 19, 2020 (edited) 5 minutes ago, P3F said: What would be the maximum estimated capacity of the Broadway Line between City Hall and Cortlandt Street, with and without CBTC? 3 minutes ago, Union Tpke said: Without CBTC 21 TPH. If done right, 30 TPH should be possible with CBTC. What UT said. The only equivocation I'd make rel. CBTC and capacity is that current NYCT CBTC architecture locks trains out of stations until the train in front is fully clear of the platform. Doesn't make a huge difference on stations where the leader can exit quickly, but at Cordlandt and City Hall (especially City Hall, given entrance speeds there are also slow) you'll need that ability to achieve full capacity. Edited March 19, 2020 by RR503 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted March 19, 2020 Share #8772 Posted March 19, 2020 58 minutes ago, RR503 said: What UT said. The only equivocation I'd make rel. CBTC and capacity is that current NYCT CBTC architecture locks trains out of stations until the train in front is fully clear of the platform. Doesn't make a huge difference on stations where the leader can exit quickly, but at Cordlandt and City Hall (especially City Hall, given entrance speeds there are also slow) you'll need that ability to achieve full capacity. While we are on the subject of issues with NYCT CBTC, how do you think the problem with CBTC and interlockings could be remedied? Is this an issue with other systems? I doubt it considering that 36 TPH can be run on the Victoria Line, which has several trains short-turn. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGA Link N Train Posted March 19, 2020 Share #8773 Posted March 19, 2020 2 hours ago, Jova42R said: Rockaway Beach Branch / QBL Express / 63 St Express / 8 Av Local Under this plan, the is rerouted to go to 96th St at all times, and the runs local from on QBL. So, QBL would be: EXPRESS LOCAL Howard Beach-JFK terminates on the middle tracks, station rebuilt Liberty Av connection to Rockaway Blvd, via Rockaway Beach Branch after here Atlantic Av Jamaica Av connection to Woodhaven Blvd Myrtle Av - Forest Park Union Tpke Yellowstone Blvd - South Forest Hills Up until this point, this proposal makes sense. 2 hours ago, Jova42R said: Alderton St - Rego Park 62 Av/Austin St Woodhaven Blvd rebuilt as a fully express station While I [somewhat] agree with rebuilding Woodhaven Blvd into an express station, I can not see this coming into fruition. Connecting the RBB to the QB Local tracks (while a contradiction to your proposal) would be a lot easier and you’d save more money. 2 hours ago, Jova42R said: Jackson Heights at the 36 St Junction, the connects with the lower level 63 St tracks, and runs express to Lex-63 Lex-63 merges with tracks, then a new station at 5 Av then, via a new tunnel under 63 St to: Central Park W connection to 59 St, merges with tracks, then makes all stops to 145 St. 145 St My critique with this is that the Lower Levels of the 63rd Street tunnel is strictly for the LIRR. So already that’s a challenge to deal with. Also, after 5th Avenue, you’re basically boring a tunnel under neath Central Park. I personally think that building the infrastructure for this new line isn’t worth it. Though. I guess it doesn’t hurt to dream. I person like to stay as realistic as possible to be honest. I also guess that this means that both you and I have very different visions with how Transit should be expanded. 1 hour ago, KK 6 Ave Local said: I think this would be the best service plan we could get out before 2050: from Fordham Road - Coney Island via 3rd Ave, 2nd Ave, Manhattan Bridge North tracks, Brighton Local from Jamaica 179th - Brighton Beach via Hillside, Bypass, 2nd Ave, MB North, Brighton Express service is diverted towards Williamsburg and service runs between Essex Street - Bay Ridge, rush hours a few trips make it to Atlantic Ave on the service now runs on fulton Local with going from Euclid Ave - LGA elevated is demolished from Bway Junction to Cypress Hills with a new elevated on Jamaica Ave, serving trains Other basic de-interlining measures at Dekalb, Rogers, 145th (a north terminal swap is also added here) If we can get all of this built, then I agree with you 90%. The communities between Broadway Junction and Cypress Hills will fight tooth and Nail for their service. Whereas, not much is happening at Jamaica Avenue. So I’d say, you’re better off adjusting the curve outside Alabama Station. Consolidating the stops between Alabama Avenue and Crescent Street. Then get some eminent domain near the south end of the curve so that you can widen it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jova42R Posted March 19, 2020 Share #8774 Posted March 19, 2020 (edited) 7 minutes ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said: Up until this point, this proposal makes sense. While I [somewhat] agree with rebuilding Woodhaven Blvd into an express station, I can not see this coming into fruition. Connecting the RBB to the QB Local tracks (while a contradiction to your proposal) would be a lot easier and you’d save more money. My critique with this is that the Lower Levels of the 63rd Street tunnel is strictly for the LIRR. So already that’s a challenge to deal with. Also, after 5th Avenue, you’re basically boring a tunnel under neath Central Park. I personally think that building the infrastructure for this new line isn’t worth it. Though. I guess it doesn’t hurt to dream. I person like to stay as realistic as possible to be honest. My only thought was that since this could be used as a JFK "Express". If we kept the as the main JFK line, then having it run QBL Local is fine. Again, to save time for JFK users. It could just run via the . After Lex-63, though, it would run via the under Central Park, and then after 7 Av, it is only one more block to 8 Av. Would it be better to then run it via 8 Av Exp instead of CPW Local? Thoughts now? Also, any thoughts on the Cross-City Line proposal? Edited March 19, 2020 by Jova42R 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGA Link N Train Posted March 19, 2020 Share #8775 Posted March 19, 2020 18 minutes ago, Jova42R said: My only thought was that since this could be used as a JFK "Express". If we kept the as the main JFK line, then having it run QBL Local is fine. Again, to save time for JFK users. It could just run via the . After Lex-63, though, it would run via the under Central Park, and then after 7 Av, it is only one more block to 8 Av. Would it be better to then run it via 8 Av Exp instead of CPW Local? Thoughts now? Also, any thoughts on the Cross-City Line proposal? I mean at this point. You’re better off reactivating the RBB ROW for the LIRR. You could run a service between Howard Beach and Penn Station. Then passengers could use the and to 59th Street-Columbus Circle. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.