Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[bobtehpanda]

2 hours ago, Jova42R said:

What?? Could you make a stop list or map? I'm not quite sure what you're talking about?

Where would the terminals be?

Also, would this be a DMU? an EDMU/BMU? an EMU?

@WillF40PH @bobtehpanda didn't you guys propose something similar to this or not?

Don't @ me.

[Jova42R]

2 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

Don't @ me.

Sorry, thought you'd proposed it.

[Jova42R]

I edited the map:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Di0UyivrsjS0uY5qzKUgPe29kBRYIzls&usp=sharing

I added the Union Tpke line connected to RBB like @LaGuardia Link N Tra proposed. I also added a revised 10 Av line like @WillF40PH and @mrsman proposed.

Thoughts?

[LGA Link N Train]

7 minutes ago, Jova42R said:

I edited the map:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Di0UyivrsjS0uY5qzKUgPe29kBRYIzls&usp=sharing

I added the Union Tpke line connected to RBB like @LaGuardia Link N Tra proposed. I also added a revised 10 Av line like @WillF40PH and @mrsman proposed.

Thoughts?

I never proposed connecting RBB with Union Turnpike. Ever. I’m not going to share my thoughts on your map mainly cause I don’t have any. Your proposals are cool but I suggest that you start reading some information on the History and Environment of the areas of where you’re proposing these Trams/Light Rail/Streetcar Services before (y’know....) proposing them. 
 

Now can we move onto another topic that has to do with subway. I like streetcars but I want to get back to discussing about the Subway. 

[Deucey]

5 hours ago, Theli11 said:

And we please drop this LRT subject, it's kinda off track from the Subway's proposal thing. I'd rather we continue our original conversation with the QBL. Let's get back to the actual subject. 

A subway proposal morphed into a LRT idea.

It’s working as it should.

[R10 2952]

14 minutes ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

I never proposed connecting RBB with Union Turnpike. Ever. I’m not going to share my thoughts on your map mainly cause I don’t have any. Your proposals are cool but I suggest that you start reading some information on the History and Environment of the areas of where you’re proposing these Trams/Light Rail/Streetcar Services before (y’know....) proposing them. 
 

Now can we move onto another topic that has to do with subway. I like streetcars but I want to get back to discussing about the Subway. 

Agreed.  All the light rail shitposting is giving me a headache.

[Jova42R]

16 minutes ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

I never proposed connecting RBB with Union Turnpike. Ever. I’m not going to share my thoughts on your map mainly cause I don’t have any. Your proposals are cool but I suggest that you start reading some information on the History and Environment of the areas of where you’re proposing these Trams/Light Rail/Streetcar Services before (y’know....) proposing them. 
 

Now can we move onto another topic that has to do with subway. I like streetcars but I want to get back to discussing about the Subway. 

Ah ok. Sorry for the mixup.

On the topic of subways, would a  extension up 21 St to Ditmars, then across on Randalls, then up 2nd/125th to Bway be feasible?

[Theli11]

3 hours ago, Jova42R said:

On the topic of subways, would a  extension up 21 St to Ditmars, then across on Randalls, then up 2nd/125th to Bway be feasible?

For this to happen we'd have to extend G-Trains, and they'd have to run more frequently, but yeah it'd be feasible. Would just need to upgrade the train tremendously. 

[bobtehpanda]

15 hours ago, Jova42R said:

Ah ok. Sorry for the mixup.

On the topic of subways, would a  extension up 21 St to Ditmars, then across on Randalls, then up 2nd/125th to Bway be feasible?

Idk what the point of going all the way north up to 125th is. That's a lot of basically dead mileage.

You could just tie in the at 86th instead after hanging west at Astoria Blvd.

[Jova42R]

17 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

Idk what the point of going all the way north up to 125th is. That's a lot of basically dead mileage.

You could just tie in the at 86th instead after hanging west at Astoria Blvd.

Just because it would be cheaper to convert the wards Island Bridge to a rail bridge and make a new lower deck on the RFK bridge across Randalls than to Bore a tunnel under 86, but frankly speaking 79 would be better.

I think another option might be to bore a tunnel under 96th then do crosstown there

The main pro of 79 is that we would have another station on Roosevelt.

The main pro of Randalls is that we would have a station on Randalls

also a crossing at Randalls would be at about 102, not 125

Edited April 9, 2020 by Jova42R

[bobtehpanda]

18 minutes ago, Jova42R said:

Just because it would be cheaper to convert the wards Island Bridge to a rail bridge and make a new lower deck on the RFK bridge across Randalls than to Bore a tunnel under 86, but frankly speaking 79 would be better.

I think another option might be to bore a tunnel under 96th then do crosstown there

The main pro of 79 is that we would have another station on Roosevelt.

The main pro of Randalls is that we would have a station on Randalls

also a crossing at Randalls would be at about 102, not 125

Reasons I like 86 better:

• 86 is an express stop on Lex; it's not on Broadway, but because Broadway is the westernmost trunk you can curve up or down to an express stop; the reverse is not true
• 86 is a busier bus line today than 79,
• 86 has a 2nd Av stop, 79 would miss SAS completely

I don't need to go into "northern Roosevelt is not underserved again"

Randall's is a park. With little opportunity for dense housing or jobs, it doesn't need a subway station. And there's nothing on 102 St, half of it doesn't exist because it is in Central Park.

[bobtehpanda]

24 minutes ago, Jova42R said:

Just because it would be cheaper to convert the wards Island Bridge to a rail bridge and make a new lower deck on the RFK bridge across Randalls than to Bore a tunnel under 86

The RFK bridge is not designed to hold the weight of trains. Neither is Ward's Island. You can't really make a bridge carry much higher weights after the fact.

Also, a subway drawbridge is all kinds of stupid.

[Jova42R]

23 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

Reasons I like 86 better:

• 86 is an express stop on Lex; it's not on Broadway, but because Broadway is the westernmost trunk you can curve up or down to an express stop; the reverse is not true
• 86 is a busier bus line today than 79,
• 86 has a 2nd Av stop, 79 would miss SAS completely

I don't need to go into "northern Roosevelt is not underserved again"

Randall's is a park. With little opportunity for dense housing or jobs, it doesn't need a subway station. And there's nothing on 102 St, half of it doesn't exist because it is in Central Park.

Ok, but since the area of 79th and York does need a new station (as @Wallyhorse has said), here’s my plan:

So maybe run the  up 21st to Broadway, then across on Broadway (with Stations at 11th St, North Roosevelt Island and York Av/82nd, then curving up to 86th to meet up with SAS. At the end of the line, After a stop at Central Park West, to connect with the , the  Would run (with a stop at 91st/Columbus), with a connection to . Maybe in a later rendition we could have a branch going up Columbus (stops at 99 and 106) to 110 then connecting to the  at 110.

Thoughts?

PS: more than half of 102 Street doesn’t exist - it also doesn’t exist between Manhattan Av and Amsterdam Av

Edited April 9, 2020 by Jova42R

[LGA Link N Train]

Say I thought of a game. If Transit has to suffer the repercussions of implementing a bad proposal (such as SAS Phase 3 or the Canal Flip) what would be the best way to plan around those repercussions with as little to no interlining as possible?

[Jova42R]

3 minutes ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Say I thought of a game. If Transit has to suffer the repercussions of implementing a bad proposal (such as SAS Phase 3 or the Canal Flip) what would be the best way to plan around those repercussions with as little to no interlining as possible?

Great Idea! Make a new thread!

[Theli11]

1 hour ago, Jova42R said:

Ok, but since the area of 79th and York does need a new station (as @Wallyhorse has said), here’s my plan:

So maybe run the  up 21st to Broadway, then across on Broadway (with Stations at 11th St, North Roosevelt Island and York Av/82nd, then curving up to 86th to meet up with SAS. At the end of the line, After a stop at Central Park West, to connect with the , the  Would run (with a stop at 91st/Columbus), with a connection to . Maybe in a later rendition we could have a branch going up Columbus (stops at 99 and 106) to 110 then connecting to the  at 110.

Thoughts?

PS: more than half of 102 Street doesn’t exist - it also doesn’t exist between Manhattan Av and Amsterdam Av

North Roosevelt Island would probably be the station with the least amount of Ridership simply because nobody is over there. It should stop at 11th York/79 St, 2nd/86 St, Lexington 86 St, 5th/86 St, CPW/86 St, Amsterdam/86 St, Broadway/96 St, and end it there.

[Jova42R]

1 minute ago, Theli11 said:

North Roosevelt Island would probably be the station with the least amount of Ridership simply because nobody is over there.

Yes, I agree

1 minute ago, Theli11 said:

It should stop at 11th York/79 St, 2nd/86 St, Lexington 86 St, 5th/86 St, CPW/86 St, Amsterdam/86 St, Broadway/96 St, and end it there.

So, from Court Sq, my plan is similar to yours:

• 41 Av
• 36 Av
• 33 Rd/10 St
• York Av/82 St
• 2 Av
• Lexington Av
• 5 Av - Met Museum
• CPW
• 91st/Columbus
• 96th

[Theli11]

2 minutes ago, Jova42R said:

• 41 Av
• 36 Av
• 33 Rd/10 St
• York Av/82 St
• 2 Av
• Lexington Av
• 5 Av - Met Museum
• CPW
• 91st/Columbus
• 96th

yes, however mine would be the following:

• 41 Av  
• 36 Av
• 11 St
• York Av/79 St
• 2 Av/86 St  
• Lexington Av/86 St  
• 5th Av/86 St
• CPW/86 St  
• Amsterdam Av/86 St
• Broadway/96 St  

[Jova42R]

Here's my North Jersey Interurban:

• TPH:
  • Peak: 4TPH (2 express, 2 short-turn at Penn, 1 express, 3 local at GWB)
  • Off-peak: 1TPH (local)
  • Nights: 0.5TPH
• Fleet:
  • Stadler GTW
• Service Patterns:
  • Butler-GWB LOCAL
  • Butler-Midtown LOCAL
  • Butler-Midtown EXPRESS (no stops after Hawthorne except Bogota, rush only)
  • Hawthorne-Midtown LOCAL
• Map:
  • https://drive.google.com/open?id=13BJlqGVNYsJ2ZgS0uM1Zb2jiHPeuWvYk&usp=sharing

Thoughts @Union Tpke @R10 2952 @B35 via Church @Theli11 @Deucey @LaGuardia Link N Tra?

[Jova42R]

2 minutes ago, Theli11 said:

yes, however mine would be the following:

• 41 Av  
• 36 Av
• 11 St
• York Av/79 St
• 2 Av/86 St  
• Lexington Av/86 St  
• 5th Av/86 St
• CPW/86 St  
• Amsterdam Av/86 St
• Broadway/96 St  

Where on 11 St?

Why not 91st/Columbus? That would negate the need for an expensive lower level of Bway, instead just crossing diagonally.

[Around the Horn]

On April 8, 2020 at 3:10 PM, Jova42R said:

Keep in mind: EVERY LINE IN MANHATTAN IS A TUNNEL!!

A BQX would not connect to manhattan, which defeats the whole purpose - people would just take the .

The 57 St Tunnel is 35TPH, which means a train every two minutes. the M57/M31 COMBINED is 20-25BPH, and is WAY slower.

Once again you are way too obsessed with a particular mode...

if the problem is that the M31 and M57 are too slow and infrequent, implement a busway on 57th Street the same way 14th Street has one and increase frequencies with the end to end time savings for a fraction of the cost of a new light rail system. Heck, if crowding on the line is a problem, convert them to artics and buy more XE60s, again for a fraction of the price of a light rail.

[R10 2952]

31 minutes ago, Jova42R said:

Here's my North Jersey Interurban:

• TPH:
  • Peak: 4TPH (2 express, 2 short-turn at Penn, 1 express, 3 local at GWB)
  • Off-peak: 1TPH (local)
  • Nights: 0.5TPH
• Fleet:
  • Stadler GTW
• Service Patterns:
  • Butler-GWB LOCAL
  • Butler-Midtown LOCAL
  • Butler-Midtown EXPRESS (no stops after Hawthorne except Bogota, rush only)
  • Hawthorne-Midtown LOCAL
• Map:
  • https://drive.google.com/open?id=13BJlqGVNYsJ2ZgS0uM1Zb2jiHPeuWvYk&usp=sharing

Thoughts @Union Tpke @R10 2952 @B35 via Church @Theli11 @Deucey @LaGuardia Link N Tra?

I have some basic ideas I've expressed about public transportation in New Jersey; but nothing too specific- they're in the NJT section:

On 11/22/2019 at 5:52 PM, R10 2952 said:

1. The North Jersey bus network sucks, plain and simple.  Non-linear routes, infinite number of variants for one line, mind-numbingly difficult to get from Newark to points north of Willowbrook (and vice-versa).  Ridiculous crowding at PABT/Midtown because too many buses terminate there when they could be running to GWB/The Heights or destinations in Fort Lee, Weehawken, Hoboken and Jersey City instead.  Also not every route needs an MCI- the 75 from Butler to Newark Penn had no use for them whatsoever, the route carried air.

2. The rail network- too much single tracking in places that should have been upgraded to double years ago, and commuter rail service is spread unevenly throughout the region (service/scheduling/infrastructure).  Not enough effort to restore viable corridors to passenger service- not saying all abandoned lines should be brought back from the dead, just saying it's odd how Jersey City has all those ferries, but you still have to use an overcrowded train station in Hoboken.  Or you listen to politicians in Passaic County talk about restoring at least partial passenger service on the Susquehanna line for 20 years, but nothing ever comes of it. 

Still think NJT has a lot of potential in terms of sheer volume and areas served, just regret that all the potential energy dissipates through inaction.

[Theli11]

31 minutes ago, Jova42R said:

Where on 11 St?

Why not 91st/Columbus? That would negate the need for an expensive lower level of Bway, instead just crossing diagonally.

Broadway - 11th St

And I think that 86/Amsterdam and rather 96 St - Amsterdam with a free transfer to Bway would actually be better than 91/Columbus and 96/Bway

[Jova42R]

5 minutes ago, Around the Horn said:

Once again you are way too obsessed with a particular mode...

if the problem is that the M31 and M57 are too slow and infrequent, implement a busway on 57th Street the same way 14th Street has one and increase frequencies with the end to end time savings for a fraction of the cost of a new light rail system. Heck, if crowding on the line is a problem, convert them to artics and buy more XE60s, again for a fraction of the price of a light rail.

The main purpose of this is NOT to serve 57th,but rather serve the underserved areas that the line runs through.

[Around the Horn]

1 minute ago, Jova42R said:

The main purpose of this is NOT to serve 57th,but rather serve the underserved areas that the line runs through.

None of these areas are underserved. They just have buses.