Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[R10 2952]

11 hours ago, MeeP15-9112 said:

I think that the  is very underutilized by the TA and has lots of potential for growth. If Brighton needs all the capacity they can get, we could reroute the  to serve some other place, preferably the West End because it had Nassau St. service up until 2010. 
The “more  than  problem” could be solved with every other Nassau St train being  during the rush hour, that way there are even amounts of  and .

I am also with you on the Jamaica El. The Jamaica El should be three trackd its whole length.
Some stations should be rebuilt for express service. Woodhaven and 121 are candidates, 121 because the Q10 to JFK is nearby (and very busy indeed) and that the Lower Montauk is two blocks down (if they ever decide to rehab the line + reopen Richmond Hill.)
All stations from Broad and 121 should be lengthened (where possible) to ten cars to begin fleet uniformity with the rest of the IND/BMT system.

 

But would having trains go between the Brighton Line and Montague Street Tunnel be really worth it? Aside from occasional G.Os that usually carried air, no regular service has been operated that way since the stopped running on Brighton in 1986.

Theoretically, you could send the service up Broadway instead of Nassau, but even then, that would require the to got through the tunnel instead of over the bridge, or require the to serve Brighton instead of Fourth Ave.  Is there even a demand along Brighton for service to Lower Manhattan?

[Theli11]

25 minutes ago, R10 2952 said:

But would having trains go between the Brighton Line and Montague Street Tunnel be really worth it? Aside from occasional G.Os that usually carried air, no regular service has been operated that way since the stopped running on Brighton in 1986.

Theoretically, you could send the service up Broadway instead of Nassau, but even then, that would require the to got through the tunnel instead of over the bridge, or require the to serve Brighton instead of Fourth Ave.  Is there even a demand along Brighton for service to Lower Manhattan?

If we put service along Brighton, there's no need for extra service down Brighton. The train on the other hand probably needs that extra service to Lower Manhattan, especially between Court - Bay Ridge, where there's no supplement service, and service is crap.  trains can run down to Bay Ridge, every six minutes (as scheduled). 

Brighton doesn't need extra service, 4th Av Local tracks do. 

[Jova42R]

1 hour ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Though I do have to point out that the line going down to south Brooklyn from Williamsburg is duplicative of the and . Also, since this "system" is running along the BQE for the Most Part, will it be directly beneath the BQE for the parts that are not in the tunnel or no? 

Not really! Some parts of the line are almost a mile away from a  station.

It is directly under (or over) the BQE except when in tunnels, and south of 15 St.

1 hour ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

For the Williamsburg Section of it, the more cost-effective alternatives in my opinion are the following:

• Extending the to 480' 8 car trains.
  • Yes, for sure!
• Consolidating Hewes and Loimer Street Stations at Union Avenue in order to build a Transfer between the and
  • Maybe just make a connection from Hewes to Broadway?
• Rebuilding Myrtle Avenue Junction to prevent Metro-bound Trains from merging with ALL  Trains
  • Yes, for sure!
• Moving Marcy Avenue to the West so that its directly on top of the Williamsbug Plaza Bus Terminal
  • Wouldn't you have to redesign the tracks to do that?
• Re-Signalling the Williamsburg Bridge
  • With CBTC.
• Expanding Essex Street Station for Future Capacity needs
  • What do you mean by expanding?

Answers in purple.

1 hour ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

All of this right here could be a package deal. As for the South Brooklyn Lightrail, I think it should be truncated to run between Red Hook and WIlliamsburg Plaza.

I'd be ok with that if the following things happened:

1. new station at 11 Av-18 St in Windsor Terrace
2.  extended down Ocean Pkwy to at least Av J
3.  extended to 18 Av

However, I still think that it'd be better to run LRT on my proposed route.

Also, how would you route a LRT line that goes to Red Hook? there's really no room to make a ROW, so it'd have to be street running, which is a massive cause for delays (as @engineerboy6561 and @B35 via Church have both said.)

1 hour ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

I don't think there needs to be a rail line near the FDR since Lower Manhattan has pretty good coverage when it comes to Transit. 

That's meant to be the Manhattan Branch, providing connections to Manhattan, and connecting (either directly or within a 5-min walk) with the  in Manhattan.

Also, Two Bridges isn't served that well. You only have one station (E Bway ), and since the LRT would have to run somewhere, I figured that this is the best route.

Edited April 11, 2020 by Jova42R

[Jova42R]

31 minutes ago, Theli11 said:

If we put service along Brighton, there's no need for extra service down Brighton. The train on the other hand probably needs that extra service to Lower Manhattan, especially between Court - Bay Ridge, where there's no supplement service, and service is crap.  trains can run down to Bay Ridge, every six minutes (as scheduled). 

Brighton doesn't need extra service, 4th Av Local tracks do. 

I agree. I'd have  on Brighton ( exp),  on 4th Local to Bay Ridge,  on West End ( exp), and  on Sea Beach ( exp)

Edited April 11, 2020 by Jova42R

[LGA Link N Train]

54 minutes ago, Jova42R said:

Not really! Some parts of the line are almost a mile away from a  station.

Pretty sure that's not the case between Smith-9th and 18th Avenue, but every other portion of you're proposed line(s) I'll agree with you. 

58 minutes ago, Jova42R said:

Maybe just make a connection from Hewes to Broadway?

If you want to be cheap about it. I prefer consolidation over this though. 

59 minutes ago, Jova42R said:

Wouldn't you have to redesign the tracks to do that?

Just a few Switches would have to be moved here and there, that's it. If I wanted to widen the curve between Marcy and the Bridge, then maybe. 

1 hour ago, Jova42R said:

With CBTC.

CBTC alone won't cut it. I'm saying that the signals should be re-aligned completely to allow for faster speed and more trains. I understand safety is an important factor to deal with when it comes to everything, but 30 consecutive timers in a row is going overboard. 

1 hour ago, Jova42R said:

What do you mean by expanding?

• Use the Trolley space and build a new platform and track there to connect with the Bridge. Move the signal tower to be directly on whatever vacant space is left of the Trolley terminal
• Close the side Platform at Essex and extended it to the current middle track. 

1 hour ago, Jova42R said:

Also, how would you route a LRT line that goes to Red Hook? there's really no room to make a ROW, so it'd have to be street running, which is a massive cause for delays (as @engineerboy6561 and @B35 via Church have both said.)

Good. If street congestion is a concern, then I'd restrict Automobile access where ever possible. TBH, I'd preserve the Red Hook-Williamsburg Portion of the BQX. With a Terminal set at Williamsburg Plaza.

[LGA Link N Train]

1 hour ago, Jova42R said:

Also, Two Bridges isn't served that well. You only have one station (E Bway ), and since the LRT would have to run somewhere, I figured that this is the best route.

Sorry for the double post, but Manhattan (Especially Downtown) is more pedestrian and Transit oriented than any other borough. The M15/M15+ isn't far away from the FDR and the waterfront of Manhattan's East side. So that's why I see the Lower Manhattan portion of your LRT idea to be unnecessary.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

On 4/10/2020 at 12:43 AM, Lex said:

Ah, yes, let's separate Brighton from 14th Street. That's a great idea.

Then why not have  via Brighton and  via 4th Avenue express with the  running over the Sea Beach Line? And don’t Brighton Line riders have greater preference for the Broadway Line over the 6th Avenue Line?

3 hours ago, Theli11 said:

If we put service along Brighton, there's no need for extra service down Brighton. The train on the other hand probably needs that extra service to Lower Manhattan, especially between Court - Bay Ridge, where there's no supplement service, and service is crap.  trains can run down to Bay Ridge, every six minutes (as scheduled). 

Brighton doesn't need extra service, 4th Av Local tracks do. 

But if the  is rerouted to Astoria and has the Broadway and 4th Avenue local tracks all to itself with no merges, then wouldn’t it be able to run more frequently and reliably? Would it even need a supplemental service? It’s only because the current three-borough local  runs so poorly that we keep suggesting extending the  or  to Bay Ridge. But if we have a completely de-interlined  running 15+ trains per hour, then I think it would make the case to extend the  or  less convincing.

Edited April 11, 2020 by T to Dyre Avenue

[Theli11]

3 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

But if the  is rerouted to Astoria and has the Broadway and 4th Avenue local tracks all to itself with no merges, then it wouldn’t it be able to run more frequently and reliably? Would it even need a supplemental service? It’s only because the current three-borough local  runs so poorly that we keep suggesting extending the  or  to Bay Ridge. But if we have a completely de-interlined  running 15+ trains per hour, then I think it would make the case to extend the  or  less convincing.

I was referring to it's current routing, if it was on Astoria, it wouldn't be needed. 

 

1 hour ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Sorry for the double post, but Manhattan (Especially Downtown) is more pedestrian and Transit oriented than any other borough. The M15/M15+ isn't far away from the FDR and the waterfront of Manhattan's East side. So that's why I see the Lower Manhattan portion of your LRT idea to be unnecessary.

The only Manhattan areas that are subway deprived is the West Side (past 10th Av/West Side Highway) from 59 St to Canal St, not including 34 St, [which I'm not entirely sure if it needs a subway there along the entire route.] And Alphabet City, which relies solely on Buses, like the M14, M9, M8, and M21. The only station in that area is in the far North West Corner of Avenue A-14 St . So I'd really only get along with a plan that would provide access there, though the buses run fine. anything pass the Willy B wouldn't be needed because of the close proximity to the trains at Essex and trains at Grand St. But both those area's don't have a pressing need for a subway. Nor would they have space for one. 

[Jova42R]

2 hours ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Pretty sure that's not the case between Smith-9th and 18th Avenue, but every other portion of you're proposed line(s) I'll agree with you. 

If you want to be cheap about it. I prefer consolidation over this though. 

Just a few Switches would have to be moved here and there, that's it. If I wanted to widen the curve between Marcy and the Bridge, then maybe. 

CBTC alone won't cut it. I'm saying that the signals should be re-aligned completely to allow for faster speed and more trains. I understand safety is an important factor to deal with when it comes to everything, but 30 consecutive timers in a row is going overboard. 

• Use the Trolley space and build a new platform and track there to connect with the Bridge. Move the signal tower to be directly on whatever vacant space is left of the Trolley terminal
• Close the side Platform at Essex and extended it to the current middle track. 

Ok, understood

2 hours ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Good. If street congestion is a concern, then I'd restrict Automobile access where ever possible. TBH, I'd preserve the Red Hook-Williamsburg Portion of the BQX. With a Terminal set at Williamsburg Plaza.

Would that connect to Greenpoint?

Also, what streets would it take between Park Av and Red Hook?

[Around the Horn]

On 4/9/2020 at 8:46 PM, B35 via Church said:

It's something to be said when he's going across multiple forums plastering ideas (seemingly whimsically) & @-ing specific people he's seeking feedback from.... I've seen a couple posts now on here, where people are expressing irritation over him doing that....

There is more of a show of ambition towards our acceptance of his ideas, than there is the willing to refine his ideas & learn anything from any commentary received regarding them (which would be reflected in future ideas, which clearly isn't the case with his bus ideas).... He's gotta get out of prioritizing the former.

I don't think there's been a single post on this forum that has been more on the nose than this one right here.

[LGA Link N Train]

3 hours ago, Jova42R said:

Would that connect to Greenpoint?

Also, what streets would it take between Park Av and Red Hook?

That’s all up to you.
 

Though frankly, I think the wise option is to see what we can do to optimize our current Transportation System that we have now. And the answers to that is right under your nose. 

Edited April 12, 2020 by LaGuardia Link N Tra

[Theli11]

14 minutes ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Though frankly, I think the wise option is to see what we can do to optimize our current Transportation System that we have now. And the answers to that is right under your nose. 

I think the time we should worry about LRT is when we can actually figure out how to make sure the best Transportation System is given to all New Yorkers, that probably won't start happening until after Phase 4, which is around.. 2060, hopefully? 

 

8 hours ago, Jova42R said:

I agree. I'd have  on Brighton ( exp),  on 4th Local to Bay Ridge,  on West End ( exp), and  on Sea Beach ( exp)

Why a train going express, when they're already going to transfer back on the /   There's no need for an express train on Sea Beach., and if there's a train what's the point of having it run every 12 minutes to Bay Ridge? that defeats the whole purpose of having extra service.   trains are another thing since there's just added merging delays on the local/express depending on what dispatchers decide goes first. That would make West End suck. Not every line needs an express train along it. especially since the is shorter than the  .

[mrsman]

While I'm supportive of deinterlining DeKalb, not really sure whether it would be better to run Broadway expresses to 4th Ave express or to Brighton.  (But I do posit a theory at the bottom of this post.)

But it does seem like a good idea to isolate the locals as one line.   from Astoria, along the Broadway local, through Lower Manhattan, ending at Bay Ridge.  No interference with other lines in regular service.  Consistent service for passengers from Astoria and Bay Ridge.

The one issue with this is the lack of dedicated yard service, but I believe it would be possible for  trains heading to the yard could run along the Sea Beach to Coney Island when necessary.

Of course doing this means removing  from QBL, which would also be an improvement to allow deinterlining there.  The transfer from 63/Lex to 59/Lex should be installed to be designed well to allow for any QBL 63rd st trains,[  likely both running as QBL expresses] to have access to  and  .  In addition to the already existing cross-platform transfer to the Broadway express  and  .
 

From the perspective of Brooklyn, let's look at what deinterlining DeKalb would mean.  It would mean that both Brighton trains would be exclusive to 6th Ave express and Sea Beach and West End would be exclusive to Broadway express OR both Brighton trains would be exclusive to Broadway express and Sea Beach and West End would be exclusive to 6th Ave express.  If this were to be done, there would be some missed direct connections, but for the most part, through the densest parts of Midtown, they run within one avenue of each other and most passengers who may be inconvenienced would not make new transfers, but rather walk an extra block.  Of course, as pointed out, for those who do really need the other service they still have the option to transfer at Atlantic Ave or 34 st.

But there are other options as well:

If you are on the 4th Ave express and want to go to wherever the Brighton trains are heading in Manhattan, you can also make two cross-platform transfers: to the  at Atlantic and to the Brighton trains heading to Manhattan at DeKalb.  This may be easier than a transfer at Atlantic (it certainly means less walking).

If you are on a 6th Ave express and want to go to East Manhattan stations, you can transfer to  at Broadway-Laffayette.  Between City Hall and Union Square the  runs very close to the Broadway BMT.  [I would also support a new-transfer from Broadway-Laffayette to Prince St  to further this option for people, but it really isn't necessary, given the proximity of  .]

Given the above two paragraphs, it may make more sense to connect Brighton to 6th Ave and Sea Beach/West End to Broadway express, even if this is against the preferences of passengers based on polls. 

If you are on the Brighton-6th Ave line and really want to go to the area of a Broadway stop: transfer to  at DeKalb for service to Downtown Brooklyn and Lower Manhattan; transfer to  at Broadway-Laffayette if you want to go between City Hall and Union Square; walk an avenue between 23rd and 59th;cross-platform transfer to  to reach the 63/Lex area; cross-platform transfer to  and then to  to hit 2nd Ave; transfer at 34 St for service to Astoria.

If you are on West End/Sea Beach-Broadway express line and really want to go to a 6th Ave stop:  cross-platform transfer at Atlantic and then again at DeKalb to hit every 6th Ave line station (especially Grand St, W4 St and transfer to , and Broadway-Laffayette if you want an in-system transfer to  toward Lower East Side ); transfer to  (or ) at Canal to get to Bleeker St station (or Prince St station) for the area near Broadway-Laffayette;  walk an avenue between 23rd and 59th; Transfer at 34 St for service along CPW; cross-platform transfer to  at 63/Lex to continue along QBL.

It seems to me that all the current connections are still totally doable even when you deinterline DeKalb.  For the cost of one additional transfer in most cases, or two cross-platfrom transfers, or a long walk transfer at Atlantic, you can still get everywhere you want.  But deinterlining will allow for a higher train service with more frequency and less crowding.

[Theli11]

4 hours ago, mrsman said:

While I'm supportive of deinterlining DeKalb, not really sure whether it would be better to run Broadway expresses to 4th Ave express or to Brighton.  (But I do posit a theory at the bottom of this post.)

 

The consequence for running 6th Av on the 4th Av Express is that, Coney Island would have less Broadway Service, and trains would run 24/7 (It's not a bad thing, but it'd have worse service than having the on there since it's quite possible it'd still terminate at 145 St limiting how many trains run in an hour), and there would be no 6th Avenue trains at DeKalb, however if you do 6th Avenue Express with Brighton, you'd still keep the 6th Avenue Service and Broadway Service on DeKalb. The only argument against DeInterlining would be the fact that you'd be forcing Broadway or 6th Avenue Riders to go to Atlantic and force them to go on the at Atlantic (or Canal on Broadway). it's worse if 6th Avenue goes via the 4th Av express because of Riders below West 4th who need to go to DeKalb, have to transfer/walk to a Broadway Service. That's also why 6th via Brighton is better.

Edited April 12, 2020 by Theli11

[bobtehpanda]

On 4/10/2020 at 10:35 PM, MeeP15-9112 said:

I think that the  is very underutilized by the TA and has lots of potential for growth. If Brighton needs all the capacity they can get, we could reroute the  to serve some other place, preferably the West End because it had Nassau St. service up until 2010. 
The “more  than  problem” could be solved with every other Nassau St train being  during the rush hour, that way there are even amounts of  and .

I am also with you on the Jamaica El. The Jamaica El should be three trackd its whole length.
Some stations should be rebuilt for express service. Woodhaven and 121 are candidates, 121 because the Q10 to JFK is nearby (and very busy indeed) and that the Lower Montauk is two blocks down (if they ever decide to rehab the line + reopen Richmond Hill.)
All stations from Broad and 121 should be lengthened (where possible) to ten cars to begin fleet uniformity with the rest of the IND/BMT system.

 

The Nassau services were primarily removed because of unpopularity. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

4 hours ago, mrsman said:

While I'm supportive of deinterlining DeKalb, not really sure whether it would be better to run Broadway expresses to 4th Ave express or to Brighton.  (But I do posit a theory at the bottom of this post.)

But it does seem like a good idea to isolate the locals as one line.   from Astoria, along the Broadway local, through Lower Manhattan, ending at Bay Ridge.  No interference with other lines in regular service.  Consistent service for passengers from Astoria and Bay Ridge.

The one issue with this is the lack of dedicated yard service, but I believe it would be possible for  trains heading to the yard could run along the Sea Beach to Coney Island when necessary.

Of course doing this means removing  from QBL, which would also be an improvement to allow deinterlining there.  The transfer from 63/Lex to 59/Lex should be installed to be designed well to allow for any QBL 63rd st trains,[  likely both running as QBL expresses] to have access to  and  .  In addition to the already existing cross-platform transfer to the Broadway express  and  .

They really need to get on with making 36 St a real yard, which would solve this problem.

63 St was built so unfortunately. It would've been better as a 57 St line.

 

[P3F]

5 hours ago, mrsman said:

But deinterlining will allow for a higher train service with more frequency and less crowding.

I don't know about this one. It's possible that the capacity limiter for Brighton is terminal capacity, rather than interlining. If that were true, deinterlining would bring absolutely no benefit to Brighton riders while making commutes worse.

[Theli11]

1 minute ago, P3F said:

I don't know about this one. It's possible that the capacity limiter for Brighton is terminal capacity, rather than interlining. If that were true, deinterlining would bring absolutely no benefit to Brighton riders while making commutes worse.

The Benefit would be faster service, and more trains that run on time, because of the interlining at DeKalb Junction. The issue is that we'd have to make Broadway Customer's transfer, but that isn't much of an issue since 6th and Broadway are close in proximity. And there's still a transfer at DeKalb, Atlantic, and 34 St. 

[CenSin]

Just entertaining ideas of what they might do to cut the norm to near bare-bones service:

• : regular service
• : replaces the in the Bronx and Brooklyn, and local in Manhattan
• : replaces the in Brooklyn from Atlantic Avenue to New Lots Avenue, and local in Manhattan
• : shuttle in the Bronx only
• : regular service
• : regular service
• : replaces the along Central Park West and all of the as a local
• : replaces the in Bronx and in Brooklyn as a local
• : replaces the in Manhattan and and in Queens as a local
• : replaces the in Manhattan and the and in Queens
• : regular service
• : regular service
• : regular service
• : shuttle in Brooklyn only
• : replaces the from 59 Street to Lexington Avenue–59 Street and all of the as a local
• : replaces the and in Manhattan as a local
• : truncated to 36 Street in Brooklyn
• (Franklin Avenue Shuttle): regular service

Summary:

• Regular: , , , , , , and (Franklin Avenue Shuttle)
• Express-to-local: , , , , , , , and
• Extended:
• Truncated: , , and
• Eliminated: (replaced by shuttle bus in Harlem), , , , ,

Pretty much all express is eliminated and redundant services cut back.

[Around the Horn]

5 hours ago, mrsman said:

Given the above two paragraphs, it may make more sense to connect Brighton to 6th Ave and Sea Beach/West End to Broadway express, even if this is against the preferences of passengers based on polls. 

I would argue that this is the passenger preference at least on 4th Avenue where  trains are far more crowded than  trains. It skewed the other way when the  was Broadway Local full time but went back as soon as it went express again. (I can't speak for Brighton as its not my home line) 

Add on Sea Beach's preference for a full time service to Manhattan (ruling out the ) and you're practically stuck with this arrangement or the local politicians along the line will want your head.

I definitely agree on the Broadway-Lafayette/Prince Street transfer... 

[LGA Link N Train]

55 minutes ago, CenSin said:

Just entertaining ideas of what they might do to cut the norm to near bare-bones service:

• : regular service
• : replaces the in the Bronx and Brooklyn, and local in Manhattan
• : replaces the in Brooklyn from Atlantic Avenue to New Lots Avenue, and local in Manhattan
• : shuttle in the Bronx only
• : regular service
• : regular service
• : replaces the along Central Park West and all of the as a local
• : replaces the in Bronx and in Brooklyn as a local
• : replaces the in Manhattan and and in Queens as a local
• : replaces the in Manhattan and the and in Queens
• : regular service
• : regular service
• : regular service
• : shuttle in Brooklyn only
• : replaces the from 59 Street to Lexington Avenue–59 Street and all of the as a local
• : replaces the and in Manhattan as a local
• : truncated to 36 Street in Brooklyn
• (Franklin Avenue Shuttle): regular service

Summary:

• Regular: , , , , , , and (Franklin Avenue Shuttle)
• Express-to-local: , , , , , , , and
• Extended:
• Truncated: , , and
• Eliminated: (replaced by shuttle bus in Harlem), , , , ,

Pretty much all express is eliminated and redundant services cut back.

This is basically late night service though...

[P3F]

1 hour ago, Theli11 said:

The Benefit would be faster service, and more trains that run on time, because of the interlining at DeKalb Junction. The issue is that we'd have to make Broadway Customer's transfer, but that isn't much of an issue since 6th and Broadway are close in proximity. And there's still a transfer at DeKalb, Atlantic, and 34 St. 

Service is already fast and would not get more than a few minutes faster. The service is currently reliable, within reason. So you're still inducing extra transfers to gain minimal benefits.

Atlantic is a horrible transfer because of how far the 4th Avenue platforms are from the Brighton ones. Transferring at DeKalb is useless because it only offers Broadway via Tunnel service, which is more than 10 minutes slower than Broadway via Bridge. Also, the is horribly unreliable.

Edited April 12, 2020 by P3F

[mrsman]

1 hour ago, Theli11 said:

The Benefit would be faster service, and more trains that run on time, because of the interlining at DeKalb Junction. The issue is that we'd have to make Broadway Customer's transfer, but that isn't much of an issue since 6th and Broadway are close in proximity. And there's still a transfer at DeKalb, Atlantic, and 34 St. 

And it's not just that there are several transfer opportunities, it's that in the largest parts of Midtown, the 6th Ave and Broadway services run relatively close together.  There is no reason that most people could not walk the distance between any Broadway line station from 23rd to 63rd to any 6th Ave line station from 23rd to 63rd, the largest employment area in the city.  Yes, Broadway people that want CPW need to transfer and 6th Ave people that want 2nd Ave need to transfer as well, but they can do that in Herald Square.  Both groups have a direct transfer to  for trips to Downtown Brooklyn and the Financial District.  So the only areas where there will really be a difference is the area betweeen Canal and 14th and the ability to reach key transfer stations like W4 and Union Sq.  But as I discussed earlier, while these areas the lines are generally farther apart, you can largely get to those areas with one transfer or possibly two easy (cross-platform) transfers.  And again, while there are jobs in this part of town, it is not nearly the same density as 23rd and north.

[mrsman]

53 minutes ago, Around the Horn said:

I would argue that this is the passenger preference at least on 4th Avenue where  trains are far more crowded than  trains. It skewed the other way when the  was Broadway Local full time but went back as soon as it went express again. (I can't speak for Brighton as its not my home line) 

Add on Sea Beach's preference for a full time service to Manhattan (ruling out the ) and you're practically stuck with this arrangement or the local politicians along the line will want your head.

I definitely agree on the Broadway-Lafayette/Prince Street transfer... 

I am content with this conclusion.   and  serve Brighton, but  is a part time train serving the Brighton express.   serves Sea Beach and  serves West End, and both can service the bridge so long as the is in service.

And while the long time operating standard is to serve basically every station even at the very late night hours, I don't believe this to be absolutely necessary.  Yes, service every neighborhood, but no need to service every platform.  That being said, and in light of COVID-19 that will restrict work hours for employees.  Do we really need an overnight service between Atlantic and Canal along the Monague Tunnel?  Could the few people making this trip be served adequately by transferring to the  ?  The  and  run very close in Lower Manhattan (and in reality in all of Manhattan below 14th), both stop at Borough Hall and do connect with all of these services at Atlantic.

[Theli11]

46 minutes ago, P3F said:

Service is already fast and would not get more than a few minutes faster. The service is currently reliable, within reason. So you're still inducing extra transfers to gain minimal benefits.

Atlantic is a horrible transfer because of how far the 4th Avenue platforms are from the Brighton ones. Transferring at DeKalb is useless because it only offers Broadway via Tunnel service, which is more than 10 minutes slower than Broadway via Bridge. Also, the is horribly unreliable.

The service is not reliable at all on the Manhattan Bridge, most trains don't go through the bridge and can take about 5 minutes just waiting for the correct track alignment to go to their correct destination. I ride the and train going to DeKalb on the Manhattan Bridge, and leaving DeKalb via Manhattan Bridge and it takes about 2-4 minutes over the bridge, and a considerable amount of time around Masstransiscope, usually waiting for a or train to pass first (going into Manhattan), or a or  train going into Brooklyn. Service isn't fast, and not as efficient as you think. 

 

30 minutes ago, mrsman said:

And while the long time operating standard is to serve basically every station even at the very late night hours, I don't believe this to be absolutely necessary.  Yes, service every neighborhood, but no need to service every platform.  That being said, and in light of COVID-19 that will restrict work hours for employees.  Do we really need an overnight service between Atlantic and Canal along the Monague Tunnel?  Could the few people making this trip be served adequately by transferring to the  ?  The  and  run very close in Lower Manhattan (and in reality in all of Manhattan below 14th), both stop at Borough Hall and do connect with all of these services at Atlantic.

The  should still run on the local tracks, and the still needs to serve Bay Ridge, and the terminal for that would be Whitehall St. The still needs to serve Lower Manhattan, so let it serve Lower Manhattan, unless you just want to put it back on the Bridge? But why would you do that? the is already on the 4th Av local tracks, and if you want a speed journey from Lower Manhattan to Midtown, you still stay on Broadway or take the train. the can't serve everything neither can the  . The  /(N) via Montague serves both East Side, Times Square, and Lower Manhattan. And honestly, I couldn't think of a single section (or station) that could be closed without more cons than pros. 

Edited April 12, 2020 by Theli11

[mrsman]

Replying to CenSin's post on DOOMSDAY service:

I like this, but I would go even further for bare bones.  I would think that some stations would have to be elminated (as is being done in Philly and Washington DC).  Where stations are closely spaced, people may have to walk to the next station for service.

As far as service, I'm draconian.

 No service south of 34th.  See next line.  Some stations closed and people will walk to the next one.

 Local service in Manhattan, and no service south of 34th, transfer to  or  for service further south in Manhattan.  Use  or  or  to transfer to  for Brooklyn IRT.  Some stations closed and people will walk to the next one.

 eliminated.  148th and 145th customers need to walk to 135th/Lenox

 Local service, extended to New Lots.  Some stations closed and people will walk to the next one.

 Dyre Ave shuttle.  Some stations closed and people will walk to the next one.

 Service extended into Brooklyn serving local stops to Flatbush Ave/Brooklyn College.  Some stations closed and people will walk to the next one.

 Local service.  No  .  Some stations closed and people will walk to the next one.

 Inwood to Far Rockaway along the local line.  No service to Lefferts.  Shuttle to Rockaway Park.  Some stations closed and people will walk to the next one.

 Eliminated.

 Eliminated.

 Bronx to West End line along the local lines but using Manhattan Bridge.  Some stations closed and people will walk to the next one.

 WTC to Jamaica Center along the local lines.  Some stations closed and people will walk to the next one.

 Full line along the local lines, CI to 179.  Some stations closed and people will walk to the next one.

 Smith/9th to Court Square.  Some stations closed and people will walk to the next one.

 Jamaica Center to Fulton St.  (Trains terminate at Broad, but station is closed to passengers).  I want to preserve the transfer to  .  Some stations closed and people will walk to the next one.

 Local service.  Some stations closed and people will walk to the next one.

 Myrtle Ave shuttle.  Some stations closed and people will walk to the next one.

 Full length of the line.  Express in Manhattan.  (See next line).  Local service in Brooklyn. via Manhattan Bridge.  Some stations closed and people will walk to the next one.

 Full length of the line.  Express in Manhattan.  All local stations on the Broadway BMT to be closed.  Use  for service in the area between Union Square and Atlantic, including Financail District and Downtown Brooklyn.  Customers wanting service at 23, 28, or 49 must walk to another nearby station.  Some stations closed and people will walk to the next one.

 Shuttle from 36St to Bay Ridge.  Some stations closed and people will walk to the next one.

 Franklin shuttle closed.

 eliminated.

 eliminated.

 

Basically, we are elminating several redundant stations and forcing people to walk.  The 7th Ave line is very close to 6th and 8th Ave services in Manhattan and the  can be used for service to Lower Manhattan to connect to Lexington trains for continuing service to Brooklyn.

The Broadway BMT south of 14th is also largely redundant in Manhattan, so most stations are eliminated.  Trains provide continuing service in order to connect to 2nd Ave, Astoria, and the Brooklyn services.  Use Lexington services to reach the local stations that are skipped.  I was also considering having N and Q Brooklyn service run as 6th Ave services (V and B) that would run to 2nd Ave and 145th St respectively, and eliminating the Broadway BMT entirely, other than a Herald Square to Astoria "shuttle".  But I felt that doing this would be more reasonable.