Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[Armandito]

How to reconfigure Court Square: 

Edited August 4, 2020 by Armandito

[Lex]

2 minutes ago, R10 2952 said:

In any case, I definitely think the  needs to be changed; we've had several decades to witness that the current route is not working as well as it could.  I'm also not a fan of the current - it shares trackage with the /, , , the , and runs shorter trains than the .  The M+V combo was not a marriage made in heaven, not by a long shot.       

That's in no small part because Fresh Pond Yard sucks at handling longer trains. Even if platforms were to be extended, that deficient storage yard would hamper service.

[Lex]

2 minutes ago, Armandito said:

How to increase turning capacity at Court Square: 

I don't see how this helps.

[shiznit1987]

Just gonna lob this one out there: 

Dream  extension: Run up 10th Ave with stops at 10th/14st, 10th/23st, 10th/34st (Transfer ), 10th/42st, 10th/50st, 10th/57st, then turn into Columbus Circle. 

Also, while not a subway, how easy would it be to do a light rail in the LIRR Bay Ridge cut? I'd see a line running from Broadway Junction to Brooklyn Army terminal doing very well. 

 

[Armandito]

Just now, Lex said:

I don't see how this helps.

The two center tracks are for terminating trains while the outer tracks are non-revenue connections to the QBL. Should  service ever be extended back to Forest Hills (which I doubt), there can still be trains that could short-turn at Court Square.

[Bay Ridge Express]

7 hours ago, CenSin said:

C’m on! Think of all the weeping widows it’d serve!

I hear it'll be a quite a popular destination with COVID 😏.

10 hours ago, Armandito said:

Better yet, remove the infamous S-curve between Cypress and Crescent and reroute the entire segment along Fulton Street via Jamaica Avenue.

I have 2 ideas in mind when it comes to the  for that segment:

1. Run only  trains through an el via Jamaica Av that would connect on the west side at Bway Junction and on the east side at ~85 St.

2. Do what was mentioned previously in this thread, have  trains make fewer stops and discontinue the . I'm leaning towards the second option being more practical since a higher frequency of trains can pass through and the Fulton St corridor is still worth serving.

2 hours ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

What's surprising is that most railfans think that the  was reliable. I was talking to a friend of mine today (who lives along West End and is more into the historical side of transit) and I told him that I didn't understand why most railfans love the so much, only to get the response of "It was reliable, useful, convenient, was a good supplement to the train, etc." I wasn't buying into it mainly because it carried air in the 2000's and whatnot. Funny thing is, this friend of mine isn't the first person to tell me all of this when I asked this. I spoken to other people (some of whom also happened to live near West End) and they also all think that the  was good and started complaining about 14 minute headway's on the  and what not. I sat there speechless because given the nature of trunk lines, people bail for the expresses in addition to the fact that most are headed towards Midtown as opposed to Nassau.

When people talk about the , they always point to its use on West End. The  simply doesn't need to go to West End; that's not the point of the routing. The point is for it to provide a split for the , which doesn't switch tracks at all in Brooklyn.

[Bay Ridge Express]

1 hour ago, Armandito said:

How to reconfigure Court Square: 

I would realign the Crosstown tracks so that the  could be extended up towards Astoria via 21 St.

1 hour ago, shiznit1987 said:

Also, while not a subway, how easy would it be to do a light rail in the LIRR Bay Ridge cut? I'd see a line running from Broadway Junction to Brooklyn Army terminal doing very well. 

Why not take it a step further and have it run to Jackson Heights or South Bronx? Though, I'm not too keen on having it be a light rail.

[R10 2952]

Quote

The point is for it to provide a split for the , which doesn't switch tracks at all in Brooklyn.

@Bay Ridge Express Yes, this is precisely what I was getting at.  If the  is shortened to run from 71st Ave to Whitehall St, you get a shorter, more manageable route and make all three tracks at Whitehall available for trains to terminate at.  Send the to 95th, and then the  can be eliminated as redundant, with some of its runs folded into the .  

Edited August 4, 2020 by R10 2952
clarity

[R10 2952]

29 minutes ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

I would realign the Crosstown tracks so that the  could be extended up towards Astoria via 21 St.

Interestingly, the original BMT plan for a Brooklyn Crosstown line actually involved running a two-track line from the northern end of the Franklin Avenue Line to the Astoria Line, if I'm not mistaken.

Edited August 4, 2020 by R10 2952

[Armandito]

30 minutes ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

I would realign the Crosstown tracks so that the  could be extended up towards Astoria via 21 Stz

3 minutes ago, R10 2952 said:

Yes, this is precisely what I was getting at.  If the  is shortened to run from 71st Ave to Whitehall St, you get a shorter, more manageable route and make all three tracks at Whitehall available for trains to terminate at.  Send the  to 95th, and then the  can be eliminated as redundant, with some of its runs folded into the .

Interestingly, the original BMT plan for a Brooklyn Crosstown line actually involved running a two-track line from the northern end of the Franklin Avenue Line to the Astoria Line, if I'm not mistaken.

 

I saw it already, though I admit the BMT plan called for the line to be elevated instead of underground like today's Crosstown Line.

Edited August 4, 2020 by Armandito

[LGA Link N Train]

12 hours ago, R10 2952 said:

Personally, I never had that big of a problem with the  running along 4th Avenue.  It did get decent ridership until the mid-1990s (when it ran there during middays), although I will admit part of the reason for that was the Manhattan Bridge being out for most of the '90s- it helped balance some of the loads off the .  Once it became a rush-only service and then the Bridge fully reopened a few years after that, ridership did drop significantly.  For what it's worth, at least it was a better service pattern than the route it had before 1986- Stillwell Ave via Brighton.  That never made sense to me.  As to 4th Avenue, I believe back in the '80s some of the Nassau <R> trains ran between Metropolitan and 95th, or at least they were scheduled to do so; have yet to find any pictures of it, though.

In any case, I definitely think the  needs to be changed; we've had several decades to witness that the current route is not working as well as it could.  I'm also not a fan of the current - it shares trackage with the /, , , the , and runs shorter trains than the .  The M+V combo was not a marriage made in heaven, not by a long shot.       

When it comes to traveling between Williamsburg and Brighton, its better to take a bus since there's no Connection between the Franklin Shuttle and the . Also, that's one thing that really bothers me about the  as we know it. I get that its a supplement for the and along 6th Avenue, Queens Blvd and Broadway-Brooklyn to a lesser extent (and I argue that it does a good job at it), but its main problem is that it merges/diverges with 4 different routes, which lowers its performance. What could be done is to swap the  and , but then that's a service decrease for those living along 63d Street. Extending it to 10 cars isn't an option either due to the limitations of Fresh Pond and East New York Yards which leads me to my 2nd Point: 

 

11 hours ago, Lex said:

That's in no small part because Fresh Pond Yard sucks at handling longer trains. Even if platforms were to be extended, that deficient storage yard would hamper service.

Fresh Pond Yard sounds like a difficult case to handle. If it were to be expanded to handle longer train cars, then not only would that require eminent domain but it would also get in the way of the bus Depot that's in that area. 

10 hours ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

1) I have 2 ideas in mind when it comes to the  for that segment:

1. Run only  trains through an el via Jamaica Av that would connect on the west side at Bway Junction and on the east side at ~85 St.

2. Do what was mentioned previously in this thread, have  trains make fewer stops and discontinue the . I'm leaning towards the second option being more practical since a higher frequency of trains can pass through and the Fulton St corridor is still worth serving.

2) When people talk about the , they always point to its use on West End. The  simply doesn't need to go to West End; that's not the point of the routing. The point is for it to provide a split for the , which doesn't switch tracks at all in Brooklyn.

1. The latter Idea is the most cost effective, but my main concern is how people would feel about new EL Infrastructure along Fulton Street and 75th Street. Even if you were to tell them that it would be a quieter concrete structure, would they support or oppose the idea?

2. First off, THANK YOU. I'm surprised that most people (specifically Railfans) don't realize this. Second off, If Train riders along West End were to receive better service, then modernizing the Signal Infrastructure along DeKalb and Streamlining the IND at 59th Street-Columbus Circle would have be crucial factors in doing that. 

At this point, the best option would be to do the following:

- Astoria to Bay Ridge

- Bay Ridge to Chambers (later Essex Street)

 - Forest Hills to Whitehall

[T to Dyre Avenue]

15 hours ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

I hear it'll be a quite a popular destination with COVID 😏.

I have 2 ideas in mind when it comes to the  for that segment:

1. Run only  trains through an el via Jamaica Av that would connect on the west side at Bway Junction and on the east side at ~85 St.

2. Do what was mentioned previously in this thread, have  trains make fewer stops and discontinue the . I'm leaning towards the second option being more practical since a higher frequency of trains can pass through and the Fulton St corridor is still worth serving.

When people talk about the , they always point to its use on West End. The  simply doesn't need to go to West End; that's not the point of the routing. The point is for it to provide a split for the , which doesn't switch tracks at all in Brooklyn.

I prefer the second option. I do agree Fulton St up to where it intersects with Eldert Lane (where Bob’s proposed new  line el would turn) is still worth serving and the Rockaway Blvd station would be in a better location for ridership as opposed to the current 75th/Eldert Lane and Cypress Hills stations (weeping widows notwithstanding). 

Agree fully that the point of reinstating a Nassau St service via the Montague Tunnel is to provide a split for the  on the Brooklyn end. The current  is limited not only by merges with other lines in Queens and Manhattan, but also the City Hall curve and getting trains into and out of 71st Avenue. 

15 hours ago, R10 2952 said:

@Bay Ridge Express Yes, this is precisely what I was getting at.  If the  is shortened to run from 71st Ave to Whitehall St, you get a shorter, more manageable route and make all three tracks at Whitehall available for trains to terminate at.  Send the to 95th, and then the  can be eliminated as redundant, with some of its runs folded into the .  

My only concern with shortening the  at Whitehall, reinstating the  to run in its place to/from 95th and eliminating the  is that it will lock the  into its current setup as a hybrid local/express that switches at 34th St. Or force the  into being fully local. I don’t particularly like either of those options. The first will continue to bork the entire Broadway Line and the second unfairly and unnecessarily forces Sea Beach Line riders back into the Montague Tunnel. Also, Whitehall isn't designed to terminate trains on all three tracks, so a new switch would have to be installed south of Rector where there are still two tracks. Otherwise, trains can only terminate on the middle track, the way the Queens-Manhattan  did during 2013-14 after Sandy.

Quote

2. First off, THANK YOU. I'm surprised that most people (specifically Railfans) don't realize this. Second off, If Train riders along West End were to receive better service, then modernizing the Signal Infrastructure along DeKalb and Streamlining the IND at 59th Street-Columbus Circle would have be crucial factors in doing that. 

At this point, the best option would be to do the following:

  - Astoria to Bay Ridge

  - Bay Ridge to Chambers (later Essex Street)

  - Forest Hills to Whitehall

@LaGuardia Link N Tra, I will agree this is the best option. I can't see how to make it work by just splitting the  without keeping the dreaded  merge at 34th or Prince. Though probably use a different letter like K or P for the Chambers service.

Edited August 4, 2020 by T to Dyre Avenue

[JeremiahC99]

41 minutes ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

When it comes to traveling between Williamsburg and Brighton, its better to take a bus since there's no Connection between the Franklin Shuttle and the . Also, that's one thing that really bothers me about the  as we know it. I get that its a supplement for the and along 6th Avenue, Queens Blvd and Broadway-Brooklyn to a lesser extent (and I argue that it does a good job at it), but its main problem is that it merges/diverges with 4 different routes, which lowers its performance. What could be done is to swap the  and , but then that's a service decrease for those living along 63d Street. Extending it to 10 cars isn't an option either due to the limitations of Fresh Pond and East New York Yards which leads me to my 2nd Point: 

My ideal solution to this would be to construct a neat connection between the Nassau Street Line and the 8th Avenue Line local tracks, which would increase capacity on both lines, but there is a problem: the tunnels and tracks for this service would have to be constructed, since a direct connection between the two does not exist as of now. So as of now, changes would be limited to the tracks already there. Therefore, with this constraint in mind, I propose simply moving the  to Astoria (with the  going to the Second Avenue Subway instead), and rerouting the  to 63rd Street. In addition to that, the  could move to the 8th Avenue express and swap with the  route north of 59th Street. Using the existing track infrastructure in Queens, the slots left vacant by the , , and  can be used by a new  route that can operate between World Trade Center and 71st Avenue via all QB Local and 8th Avenue Local.

Pros:

• Less merging on the  and and other lines overall (ex:  merges with   and  instead of    and )
• Increased service on 63rd Street, while retaining the same service levels on 53rd Street.
• Service increase on both 8th Avenue and Broadway due to less merging overall
• More reliable  service.
• No need to schedule trains around 59th Street. Delays insulated onto some lines but not affecting nearly the entire system.

Cons:

• Increased merging activity at 36th Street could increase the likelihood for delays on the , ,  and  (though as a counterpoint, the delays would be insulated to those lines and a few others, and not affect the whole system).
• No upper level service at 50th Street.
• Lack of yard access for the  (counterpoint: 36th Street Yard to be used for passenger train service)
• Potential conflicts with turning 5 of the  trains at Whitehall Street and Queensboro.

Queens Blvd alternatives:

•  express, local.
  • Cuts off local service to/from Queens Plaza.
•  local,  Express
  •  operates at 24 trains per hour.
  • Cuts off express service to/from Queens Plaza.

What could really go wrong?

4 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

My only concern with shortening the  at Whitehall and reinstating the  to run in its place and eliminating the  is that it will lock the  into its current setup as a hybrid local/express that switches at 34th St. Or force the  into being fully local. I don’t particularly like either of those options. The first will continue to bork the entire Broadway Line and the second unfairly and unnecessarily forces Sea Beach Line riders back into the Montague Tunnel.

Or we could do what I stated above. With this, the  would operate to Ditmars, and the  would go to 96th Street, with the other changes mentioned implemented.

[Bklyn Bound 2 Local]

How about a 110 street crosstown line in manhattan? 

[bobtehpanda]

7 minutes ago, Bklyn Bound 2 Local said:

How about a 110 street crosstown line in manhattan? 

The bus isn't even that busy, why would we build a subway there?

[Bklyn Bound 2 Local]

2 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

The bus isn't even that busy, why would we build a subway there?

It could go through queens to LGA as a faster substitute for the M60

[LGA Link N Train]

33 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

@LaGuardia Link N Tra, I will agree this is the best option. I can't see how to make it work by just splitting the  without keeping the dreaded  merge at 34th or Prince.

 - 96th Street/2nd Avenue to Coney Island, shares tracks with the up until DeKalb Junction.

- Asotria to Bay Ridge. With a 15 TPH cap at Ditmars, a 21 TPH cap near City Hall, and a 10-12 Cap at Bay Ridge, it'll make sense to run the line at 14TPH. Service takes up the remaining space so it could have 7 TPH.

Assuming that we Upgrade Bay Ridge's terminal capacity, we should be able to boost it to 24-30 TPH. I don't know how feasible adding relay tracks would be but they could be a nice addition. From there, about 6-8 Trains could run to Chambers Street. That's how I'd do it. 

 

Slightly off topic, but it seems like nearly every proposal to maximize the efficiency of the current system requires some sort of infrastructure upgrade

[JeremiahC99]

Just now, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Slightly off topic, but it seems like nearly every proposal to maximize the efficiency of the current system requires some sort of infrastructure upgrade

Including mine, because the recent one I posted can be done on existing tracks?

[R10 2952]

1 hour ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

When it comes to traveling between Williamsburg and Brighton, its better to take a bus since there's no Connection between the Franklin Shuttle and the . Also, that's one thing that really bothers me about the  as we know it. I get that its a supplement for the and along 6th Avenue, Queens Blvd and Broadway-Brooklyn to a lesser extent (and I argue that it does a good job at it), but its main problem is that it merges/diverges with 4 different routes, which lowers its performance. What could be done is to swap the  and , but then that's a service decrease for those living along 63d Street. Extending it to 10 cars isn't an option either due to the limitations of Fresh Pond and East New York Yards which leads me to my 2nd Point: 

To me, the easiest solution would be to reinstate the , and send the  to 95th-4th to replace the  in Brooklyn.

1 hour ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Agree fully that the point of reinstating a Nassau St service via the Montague Tunnel is to provide a split for the  on the Brooklyn end. The current  is limited not only by merges with other lines in Queens and Manhattan, but also the City Hall curve and getting trains into and out of 71st Avenue. 

My only concern with shortening the  at Whitehall, reinstating the  to run in its place to/from 95th and eliminating the  is that it will lock the  into its current setup as a hybrid local/express that switches at 34th St. Or force the  into being fully local. I don’t particularly like either of those options. The first will continue to bork the entire Broadway Line and the second unfairly and unnecessarily forces Sea Beach Line riders back into the Montague Tunnel. Also, Whitehall isn't designed to terminate trains on all three tracks, so a new switch would have to be installed south of Rector where there are still two tracks. Otherwise, trains can only terminate on the middle track, the way the Queens-Manhattan  did during 2013-14 after Sandy.

1. How so? There are switches north of 57th-7th that would allow the  to remain express after 34th; in all honesty, the  should never have been switching at 34th in the first place.

2. All they'd have to do is install a crossover north of Whitehall.

[Lex]

1 hour ago, Bklyn Bound 2 Local said:

It could go through queens to LGA as a faster substitute for the M60

Then put it on 125th Street...

[bobtehpanda]

1 hour ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Slightly off topic, but it seems like nearly every proposal to maximize the efficiency of the current system requires some sort of infrastructure upgrade

The existing infrastructure is great where it doesn't need to be and sucks where it does. And right now if you optimize the trains you actually f**k over riders. For all its faults, the M/V combo is way more useful to riders than the old separate V and M services, because it took a bunch of trains terminating nowhere in the LES to going somewhere useful for Myrtle and Broadway riders. It's not really a coincidence that the gentrification of Ridgewood ripped into full gear once the orange M happened.

[Bklyn Bound 2 Local]

14 minutes ago, Lex said:

Then put it on 125th Street...

When It's on 116 St it would cut the corner and so be quicker

[Armandito]

45 minutes ago, R10 2952 said:

When it comes to traveling between Williamsburg and Brighton, its better to take a bus since there's no Connection between the Franklin Shuttle and the .

Which once again brings me back to connecting the Crosstown and Franklin Avenue Lines. While subways are far from perfect, at least they're faster than buses.

[R10 2952]

@Armandito You mis-attributed @LaGuardia Link N Tra's quote to me.

 

[Lex]

8 minutes ago, Bklyn Bound 2 Local said:

When It's on 116 St it would cut the corner and so be quicker

Now it's 116th Street?

Either way, the best substitute for a bus on 125th Street (to/from LGA) is a train following 125th Street (to/from LGA).