Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[loveofelevators]

5 hours ago, Vulturious said:

There are so many questionable things you decided to do, but I'm mainly going to point out the things that already exist:

1.) Why does the  operate via 4th Av line and 6th Av line?

2.) Why is the  also operating in Staten Island?

3.) Which lines are going express on 4th Av and which isn't?

4.) Why are trains stopping at Myrtle Av? They are 1 street away from Dekalb, not to mention there is no station at Myrtle Av.

5.) Is there a lower tunnel underneath 4th Av line that allows  trains to skip all the  stations?

6.) There is no tunnels or tracks that can get to York St from Dekalb Av.

7.) You have 6 lines operating via 6th Av which you already screwed up by bringing the  and keeping the . 

8.) There are no tracks or tunnels that can allow switching from 6th Av and Broadway Line at 34th St-Herald Square.

WHAT! IT'S JUST A PROPOSAL! What's wrong with that?!

[F O O L]

19 minutes ago, loveofelevators said:

WHAT! IT'S JUST A PROPOSAL! What's wrong with that?!

And it could be a better proposal by accepting feedback ;). No seriously i feel like thats the point of forums: to introduce, critque, and develop ideas. i dont necessarily see the logic of the argument of "its just a proposal" here.

Perhaps for future proposals include more detail on the routes like if you're gonna add any switches or something cause i don't understand the routing and transfers you've proposed. It'll be easier to flesh out, better design these proposals, and actually learn something by doing these because I mean, it would be nice to figure out how we could plan a subway to staten island. 

Edited September 1, 2020 by F O O L

[B35 via Church]

32 minutes ago, loveofelevators said:

WHAT! IT'S JUST A PROPOSAL! What's wrong with that?!

Everything, if you're incapable of defending your own proposal !

[Vulturious]

1 hour ago, loveofelevators said:

WHAT! IT'S JUST A PROPOSAL! What's wrong with that?!

 

1 hour ago, F O O L said:

And it could be a better proposal by accepting feedback ;). No seriously i feel like thats the point of forums: to introduce, critque, and develop ideas. i dont necessarily see the logic of the argument of "its just a proposal" here.

Perhaps for future proposals include more detail on the routes like if you're gonna add any switches or something cause i don't understand the routing and transfers you've proposed. It'll be easier to flesh out, better design these proposals, and actually learn something by doing these because I mean, it would be nice to figure out how we could plan a subway to staten island. 

Whatever this guy said was what I was going to say. If it was set as a joke, I probably would've said the same thing regardless. Practically everything I pointed out, everyone else would've probably agreed with, if not, say more than what I've said. It wouldn't have sounded bad if you actually went ahead and looked at all the track layouts and explained why you have it set the way it is.

[LGA Link N Train]

3 hours ago, loveofelevators said:

WHAT! IT'S JUST A PROPOSAL! What's wrong with that?!

Nothings wrong with that. However, we're just confused as to how it would be built or what the rationale behind the proposal is, and you're exxagerated tone in response to the criticism you got isn't helping your case. This may not matter to you, but I like to keep my proposals as realistic as possible (while still being a proposal). Also, here are some fun resources for you that you can reference to whenever you decide to think of another idea (not all ideas in the documents I'm linking down below are the best, but are pretty fun to think about):

https://www.vanshnookenraggen.com/_index/docs/NYC_full_trackmap.pdf

http://web.mta.info/nyct/service/pdf/AC_LineReview.pdf

https://new.mta.info/sites/default/files/2019-12/MTA NYCT Subway Speed and Capacity Review_Final Report.pdf

https://www.pcac100daysandnights.org/

http://fourthplan.org/

https://rpa.org/work/reports/save-our-subways#key-findings

 

Edited September 2, 2020 by LaGuardia Link N Tra

[Armandito]

Assuming Phase 4 of the SAS is finished, would it be ideal to build a connection to the Montague Street Tunnel? Fourth Avenue and West End could probably benefit from an SAS service if such a connection is ever approved.

[LGA Link N Train]

26 minutes ago, Armandito said:

Assuming Phase 4 of the SAS is finished, would it be ideal to build a connection to the Montague Street Tunnel? Fourth Avenue and West End could probably benefit from an SAS service if such a connection is ever approved.

Ehhh.... I don't think so. The way I see it is if you want SAS to go to 4th Avenue and South Brooklyn, that'll have to come at the expense of having direct 6th Avenue Service. Unfortunately, you simply can't gain certain things in life without sacrificing other things.

[Vulturious]

39 minutes ago, Armandito said:

Assuming Phase 4 of the SAS is finished, would it be ideal to build a connection to the Montague Street Tunnel? Fourth Avenue and West End could probably benefit from an SAS service if such a connection is ever approved.

 

10 minutes ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Ehhh.... I don't think so. The way I see it is if you want SAS to go to 4th Avenue and South Brooklyn, that'll have to come at the expense of having direct 6th Avenue Service. Unfortunately, you simply can't gain certain things in life without sacrificing other things.

So would it be better to just replace the  then if that were to be the case. I do miss having express trains running on West End when the  was around, but I think this would allow for express to run regardless. My reason is because  trains on West End runs express like everyday, either because there wasn't enough  trains running on 4th Av or because a  train was just running late. This would still be good for Ridgewood Riders because they still have access deeper into Manhattan, if anything, have  trains extended to Bay Ridge during the day.

[B35 via Church]

1 hour ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Nothings wrong with that. However, we're just confused as to how it would be built or what the rationale behind the proposal is, and you're exxagerated tone in response to the criticism you got isn't helping your case....

....usually because the rationale is rather aimless - which is why I say it's everything wrong with it & the person proposing it.

*wut, iTs JuSt A pRoPoSaL* is an evasive & irresponsible answer to someone asking pertinent questions about someone's ideas.... You should be prideful that someone even took time out to read & inquire about the damn thing afterwards....

[Bay Ridge Express]

1 hour ago, Armandito said:

Assuming Phase 4 of the SAS is finished, would it be ideal to build a connection to the Montague Street Tunnel? Fourth Avenue and West End could probably benefit from an SAS service if such a connection is ever approved.

via the Montague Tunnel, no... there's no reason to unless after Phase 4, the job market in the general area of Seaport increases drastically, but as of now, Midtown is the main hub, so it would be more ideal to have a Manhattan Bridge connection. That being said, however, this would also mean that either Broadway/6 Av service on the bridge would have to be replaced, and there is no easy way to do that without extensive construction. I would just not let the  (or whatever) get caught up on 4 Av... building a connection to the Fulton Lcl tracks would be beneficial to  riders however and it would help clear up that merge on Fulton.

Hopefully, there will also be a seamless cross-platform transfer at Grand St.

Edited September 2, 2020 by Bay Ridge Express

[Armandito]

36 minutes ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

Hopefully, there will also be a seamless cross-platform transfer at Grand St.

And switches too.

On the other hand, there also needs to be an SAS service to Jamaica via a new super-express QBL bypass to relieve pressure on Lexington transfers. Here's what my plan calls for:

- skips 75 Av and Briarwood at all times except late nights; otherwise unchanged

- all service rerouted via QBL Bypass; rest of route unchanged

- new full-time SAS service between 179 St and Hanover Sq via 63 St and QBL Bypass, making local stops east of 71 Av

Thoughts on this?

Edited September 2, 2020 by Armandito

[Vulturious]

1 hour ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

via the Montague Tunnel, no... there's no reason to unless after Phase 4, the job market in the general area of Seaport increases drastically, but as of now, Midtown is the main hub, so it would be more ideal to have a Manhattan Bridge connection. That being said, however, this would also mean that either Broadway/6 Av service on the bridge would have to be replaced, and there is no easy way to do that without extensive construction. I would just not let the  (or whatever) get caught up on 4 Av... building a connection to the Fulton Lcl tracks would be beneficial to  riders however and it would help clear up that merge on Fulton.

Hopefully, there will also be a seamless cross-platform transfer at Grand St.

Yeah, I do agree it would be a better idea to have the  run via Fulton to allow for the  to actually be an express service that way Lefferts people won't complain of not having an express service. This would also allow  trains to have better service and also clear up a merge on Fulton like you said. If they do plan on having cross-platform transfer, they better have some X-switches to reroute trains if needed.

[mrsman]

9 hours ago, Armandito said:

Assuming Phase 4 of the SAS is finished, would it be ideal to build a connection to the Montague Street Tunnel? Fourth Avenue and West End could probably benefit from an SAS service if such a connection is ever approved.

There are pros and cons to running SAS through the Montague tunnel.  IMO, a big pro is that it could ultimately save a lot of tunneling costs.  If SAS were routed to take over the Nassau line south of Chambers (forcing  to terminate at Chambers), you avoid the need to dig a tunnel in the southernmost mile of Manhattan.  At that point, SAS would provide a natural connection to Montague and the 4th Ave local service.  Just as you (and others) proposed plans to in some way revive "Banker's special" <R> trains along Nassau that do end up in some capacity along the Williamsburg Bridge, something like this would instead route those "Banker's special" along SAS instead.

One key downside though is the overall network effect of doing this.  There is a limit as to how many trains can run through the Montague tunnel, so an increase in service on SAS would amount to a decrease in service (or cause more trains trains to terminate at Whitehall) along the  line.  To run as much service as possible for the system as a whole, ideally you want each trunk line to have its own dedicated tunnel/bridge to Brooklyn.

Right now, you have six trunk lines and five portals (tunnels/bridges), as follows:

8th Ave express - Cranberry tunnel

8th Ave local - NO TUNNEL.  This fact impacts current 8th Ave services and reduces the ability to run more 8th Ave express services as  switches tracks at Canal.

6th Ave express - Manhattan Bridge North

6th Ave local - Rutgers tunnel*

Broadway express - Manhattan Bridge South

Broadway local - Montague tunnel

* Of course,  trains run to the Williamsburg Bridge, but doing so necessarily limits the number of trains through the Rutgers tunnel.

SAS would introduce a seventh trunk line.  Ideally we would need an additional portal to Brooklyn to get as much as we can out of the SAS line.  As mentioned above by others, there are two ways of doing that: a) a new tunnel from SAS to Brooklyn or b) rerouting tracks to make the Williamsburg Bridge a sixth portal connection to Midtown.

(b) can be done in several ways.  Routing all SAS to the W Bridge would allow an increase in service on Rutgers tunnel, but would prevent SAS from reaching Downtown or Southern Brooklyn.  Routing 6th Ave express to W Bridge will allow SAS to be routed to the M Bridge.  

 

 

 

[loveofelevators]

Line:  New Lots Line

 serves Utica Avenue Subway

Staions:

Borough Hall:  [Express Station]

Fulton Street [Local Station]

Hoyt Street [Local Station

Nevins Street [Express Station]

Atlantic-Barclays:  [Express Station}

Bergen Street [Local Station]

Grand Army Plaza [Local Station]

E Pkwy-Bklyn Museum [Local Station]

Franklin Avenue:  [Express Station]

Nostrand Avenue [Local Station]

Kingston Avenue [Local Station]

Crown Heights-Utica Av:

[ replaces Livonia Avenue Line]

Rutland Road [Local Station]

East 96th Street [Local Station]

Sutter Avenue [Express Station]

Winthrop Street [Local Station]

Saratoga Avenue [Local Station}

Rockaway Avenue [Local Station]

Junius Street:  [Express Station]

Pennsylvania Avenue [Local Station]

Van Siclen Avenue [Local Station]

New Lots Avenue:  [Express Station]

 

 

 

 

[Armandito]

6 minutes ago, loveofelevators said:

Line:  New Lots Line

 serves Utica Avenue Subway

Staions:

Borough Hall:  [Express Station]

Fulton Street [Local Station]

Hoyt Street [Local Station

Nevins Street [Express Station]

Atlantic-Barclays:  [Express Station}

Bergen Street [Local Station]

Grand Army Plaza [Local Station]

E Pkwy-Bklyn Museum [Local Station]

Franklin Avenue:  [Express Station]

Nostrand Avenue [Local Station]

Kingston Avenue [Local Station]

Crown Heights-Utica Av:

[ replaces Livonia Avenue Line]

Rutland Road [Local Station]

East 96th Street [Local Station]

Sutter Avenue [Express Station]

Winthrop Street [Local Station]

Saratoga Avenue [Local Station}

Rockaway Avenue [Local Station]

Junius Street:  [Express Station]

Pennsylvania Avenue [Local Station]

Van Siclen Avenue [Local Station]

New Lots Avenue:  [Express Station]

 

 

 

 

If there's no rationale behind those unrealistic "proposals" you're posting here, you're just trolling and clogging up the thread with nonsense 😕

[loveofelevators]

1 minute ago, Armandito said:

If there's no rationale behind those unrealistic "proposals" you're posting here, you're just trolling and clogging up the thread with nonsense 😕.

 

By That, I Mean The  trains run via Livonia Avenue line, and  and  trains run on the New Lots Avenue branch. Get That?

[Lex]

1 hour ago, loveofelevators said:

Line:  New Lots Line

 serves Utica Avenue Subway

Staions:

Borough Hall:  [Express Station]

Fulton Street [Local Station]

Hoyt Street [Local Station

Nevins Street [Express Station]

Atlantic-Barclays:  [Express Station}

Bergen Street [Local Station]

Grand Army Plaza [Local Station]

E Pkwy-Bklyn Museum [Local Station]

Franklin Avenue:  [Express Station]

Nostrand Avenue [Local Station]

Kingston Avenue [Local Station]

Crown Heights-Utica Av:

[ replaces Livonia Avenue Line]

Rutland Road [Local Station]

East 96th Street [Local Station]

Sutter Avenue [Express Station]

Winthrop Street [Local Station]

Saratoga Avenue [Local Station}

Rockaway Avenue [Local Station]

Junius Street:  [Express Station]

Pennsylvania Avenue [Local Station]

Van Siclen Avenue [Local Station]

New Lots Avenue:  [Express Station]

 

 

 

 

Did you just get this from someone's BVE project or something?

[LGA Link N Train]

2 hours ago, loveofelevators said:

Line:  New Lots Line

**Stops Listed Here**

While Physically possible, I don't see a reason as to why we should send the to Brooklyn. Lexington Express already has enough to deal with in addition that your proposal makes Rogers Avenue Junction a bigger bottleneck than it already is. 

4 hours ago, mrsman said:

One key downside though is the overall network effect of doing this.  There is a limit as to how many trains can run through the Montague tunnel, so an increase in service on SAS would amount to a decrease in service (or cause more trains trains to terminate at Whitehall) along the  line.  To run as much service as possible for the system as a whole, ideally you want each trunk line to have its own dedicated tunnel/bridge to Brooklyn.

True. While connecting SAS to Montague wouldn't save much IMO, it would be interesting if we did the following:

6th Ave Express - Williamsburg 

6th Ave Local - Rutgers/Culver

 Nassau - Montague/4th Ave Local

2nd Avenue - Manhattan Bridge North/4th or Brighton

Broadway Express - Manhattan Bridge South/4th or Brighton 

Broadway Local - New Tunnel connection to Fulton Local 

 8th Avenue Express - Fulton Express.

Doing these connections in addition to building transfers in Key areas would provide a system wide benefit as every Manhattan-Brooklyn connection would be gaining access to Midtown in addition to providing a better integration between the IND and BMT. 

[Vulturious]

3 hours ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

While Physically possible, I don't see a reason as to why we should send the to Brooklyn. Lexington Express already has enough to deal with in addition that your proposal makes Rogers Avenue Junction a bigger bottleneck than it already is. 

True. While connecting SAS to Montague wouldn't save much IMO, it would be interesting if we did the following:

6th Ave Express - Williamsburg 

6th Ave Local - Rutgers/Culver

 Nassau - Montague/4th Ave Local

2nd Avenue - Manhattan Bridge North/4th or Brighton

Broadway Express - Manhattan Bridge South/4th or Brighton 

Broadway Local - New Tunnel connection to Fulton Local 

 8th Avenue Express - Fulton Express.

Doing these connections in addition to building transfers in Key areas would provide a system wide benefit as every Manhattan-Brooklyn connection would be gaining access to Midtown in addition to providing a better integration between the IND and BMT. 

There are a few questions I do like to ask, not saying these ideas are bad and all, I just want to have some clarification for some of these ideas.

1.) So the  and  would basically run via Williamsburg, but what about the whole 75 Footers? It's possible to have a yard swap, but that would mean Concourse would have to change their fleets also. Where would these trains be based out of, Concourse or ENY? Where would these trains run to, make the same stops as ? Now raises a bigger question, is it really worth shortening 6th Av express trains to accommodate all the other stations in Brooklyn and Queens?

2.) I really don't mind this idea at all actually. It's basically having the  extended via Culver which would then make  trains run express. 

3.) Like I said about where would the , where would the  run?

5.) Combining both the  and the  and , I wouldn't mind having the  in South Brooklyn, although if I had to say where it should run, I would rather it run via Brighton, that way either the  or  running via West End would have a better connection and be centered around Midtown. 

6.) I've seen a lot of proposals about the  and  having a new tunnel connection to Fulton Local, but the  already is long as is which would just make it as long as the  is. And since it is local too, I feel it would be more unreliable. Then again, that is just my opinion, might not since it isn't running via 4th Av and better service would be provided for 4th Av. At least then, it would provide better service for both the  and  because it is running express. Where would the , , , and  yard be based out of? I'm guessing 207th for the , Jamaica still for the , but that would mean less trains for the  as well as the , and I guess Pitkin for the . This is actually a tough question, maybe someone has a way to make this work.

[JeremiahC99]

16 minutes ago, Vulturious said:

6.) I've seen a lot of proposals about the  and  having a new tunnel connection to Fulton Local, but the  already is long as is which would just make it as long as the  is. And since it is local too, I feel it would be more unreliable. Then again, that is just my opinion, might not since it isn't running via 4th Av and better service would be provided for 4th Av. At least then, it would provide better service for both the  and  because it is running express. Where would the , , , and  yard be based out of? I'm guessing 207th for the , Jamaica still for the , but that would mean less trains for the  as well as the , and I guess Pitkin for the . This is actually a tough question, maybe someone has a way to make this work.

You would offset this by rerouting the  to Astoria-Ditmars, and having the  move to 96th Street. You could then rearrange Queens Blvd service by having the  express on Queens Blvd via 63rd and have the  local on Queens Blvd. Rearrange the  and  on 8th Avenue so that the  and  express and  and  local, then have  to 207th and 168th and the  to the Concourse Line and you should have more reliable train service. The  would be based out of Pitkin Yard and the  and  fleet will be consolidated to 207th Street Yard. Additional yard space should also be build out in Astoria as well.

16 minutes ago, Vulturious said:

Like I said about where would the , where would the  run?

You could terminate the  at Essex Street. A lot of plans for the  to Williamsburg feature this.

18 minutes ago, Vulturious said:

1.) So the  and  would basically run via Williamsburg, but what about the whole 75 Footers? It's possible to have a yard swap, but that would mean Concourse would have to change their fleets also. Where would these trains be based out of, Concourse or ENY? Where would these trains run to, make the same stops as ? Now raises a bigger question, is it really worth shortening 6th Av express trains to accommodate all the other stations in Brooklyn and Queens?

 

All yards in the system and all  stations would be modified for longer trains.

[LGA Link N Train]

23 minutes ago, Vulturious said:

There are a few questions I do like to ask, not saying these ideas are bad and all, I just want to have some clarification for some of these ideas.

1.) So the  and  would basically run via Williamsburg, but what about the whole 75 Footers? It's possible to have a yard swap, but that would mean Concourse would have to change their fleets also. Where would these trains be based out of, Concourse or ENY? Where would these trains run to, make the same stops as ? Now raises a bigger question, is it really worth shortening 6th Av express trains to accommodate all the other stations in Brooklyn and Queens?

2.) I really don't mind this idea at all actually. It's basically having the  extended via Culver which would then make  trains run express. 

3.) Like I said about where would the , where would the  run?

5.) Combining both the  and the  and , I wouldn't mind having the  in South Brooklyn, although if I had to say where it should run, I would rather it run via Brighton, that way either the  or  running via West End would have a better connection and be centered around Midtown. 

6.) I've seen a lot of proposals about the  and  having a new tunnel connection to Fulton Local, but the  already is long as is which would just make it as long as the  is. And since it is local too, I feel it would be more unreliable. Then again, that is just my opinion, might not since it isn't running via 4th Av and better service would be provided for 4th Av. At least then, it would provide better service for both the  and  because it is running express. Where would the , , , and  yard be based out of? I'm guessing 207th for the , Jamaica still for the , but that would mean less trains for the  as well as the , and I guess Pitkin for the . This is actually a tough question, maybe someone has a way to make this work.

Guess I'll clarify a little bit. 

1. Think about this. By the time Phase 3 ever gets built, there will be a very high chance that all 75 Footers would be retired and be replaced by newer (60 foot) equipment. At the same time, the idea of extending platforms (and consolidating stations) on the BMT Eastern Division is one that would have to be implemented in order for this reroute to work. Even without Phase 3 and the idea I pit up, I think expanding the BMT Eastern Division would be beneficial not only in the long term, but in the short term as well. 

3. The  would run between Bay Ridge and (an expanded) Essex Street. During the evenings and overnight, trains could deadhead to ENY Yard, (which i also recommend expanding to fit longer trains). 

5. I guess but given the considerable amount of Distance between Broadway and 2nd Avenue in Manhattan, there wouldn't much of a reason to deinterline DeKalb now. 

6. I understand your concern over the , but if that's the case, might as well reroute it to Astoria and fold the into the . A nice little bonus is that an running from Astoria-Euclid would still have Yard Access to Pitkin. And then maybe something else could run in place of the  on Queens Blvd, Maybe a  Train, but doing that would force you to deinterline CPW/8th Avenue. 

If you want, I can make a map to clear things up. 

 

[Vulturious]

1 hour ago, JeremiahC99 said:

You would offset this by rerouting the  to Astoria-Ditmars, and having the  move to 96th Street. You could then rearrange Queens Blvd service by having the  express on Queens Blvd via 63rd and have the  local on Queens Blvd. Rearrange the  and  on 8th Avenue so that the  and  express and  and  local, then have  to 207th and 168th and the  to the Concourse Line and you should have more reliable train service. The  would be based out of Pitkin Yard and the  and  fleet will be consolidated to 207th Street Yard. Additional yard space should also be build out in Astoria as well.

You could terminate the  at Essex Street. A lot of plans for the  to Williamsburg feature this.

All yards in the system and all  stations would be modified for longer trains.

Interesting, weird how you have the  running via Concourse and replacing  trains. I highly doubt that would happen since  trains have been running via Concourse for a very long time just for it to be swapped out and you also have  trains based out of 207th Street when it's running via Concourse. Unless you plan on having  trains based out of Concourse, there is no reason to have it based out of 207th. There still need to be a lot of modifications to the rest of Jamaica El line as well as Myrtle Av line because of how tight the curves are and there isn't any express between Broadway Junction and Jamaica Center. 

1 hour ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Guess I'll clarify a little bit. 

1. Think about this. By the time Phase 3 ever gets built, there will be a very high chance that all 75 Footers would be retired and be replaced by newer (60 foot) equipment. At the same time, the idea of extending platforms (and consolidating stations) on the BMT Eastern Division is one that would have to be implemented in order for this reroute to work. Even without Phase 3 and the idea I pit up, I think expanding the BMT Eastern Division would be beneficial not only in the long term, but in the short term as well. 

3. The  would run between Bay Ridge and (an expanded) Essex Street. During the evenings and overnight, trains could deadhead to ENY Yard, (which i also recommend expanding to fit longer trains). 

5. I guess but given the considerable amount of Distance between Broadway and 2nd Avenue in Manhattan, there wouldn't much of a reason to deinterline DeKalb now. 

6. I understand your concern over the , but if that's the case, might as well reroute it to Astoria and fold the into the . A nice little bonus is that an running from Astoria-Euclid would still have Yard Access to Pitkin. And then maybe something else could run in place of the  on Queens Blvd, Maybe a  Train, but doing that would force you to deinterline CPW/8th Avenue. 

If you want, I can make a map to clear things up. 

 

1.) Yeah I completely agree with modifying BMT Eastern Division, the curves, short stations, as well as not having a third track for express service between Broadway Junction and Jamaica Center. It won't really benefit Midtown as well as Uptown and Bronx riders to ride trains that aren't full length 10 car size. It worked for the  because it's local all the way and people would rather ride an express train rather taking local which is longer travel time.

3.) By expanded, you mean by having another platform dedicated to terminating  trains? I'm assuming this is what you mean. That isn't a bad idea, but there needs to be some sort of express service which the  can help with being local and the  running express.

5.) Obviously there wouldn't because there isn't any 6th Av train running at all in South Brooklyn anymore, now I just realized which train is going to run via 4th Av and which is running Brighton?

6.) That's a really good idea since that would mean less train lines that are based out of Coney Island. CIY would have to only deal with the , , , and  trains. I don't know if  trains would be rerouted in this scenario to 2nd Av, but I think it's best to keep  trains at Astoria, but instead of switching at 34 St-Herald Square, have it switch at 57 St-7 Av. There is probably going to be less service provided at Astoria so keeping an express service at Astoria wouldn't be as bad.

I don't really need a map, but I would like it to see how you plan on having the service run.

[loveofelevators]

Line: SAS

Stations: 

Norwood-205 St

Bedford Park Blvd:

Kingsbridge Rd:

Fordham Rd:

182-183 Sts:

Tremont Av:

174-175 Sts:

170 St:

167 St:

161-Yankee Stad:

155 St:

145 St:

{passes 135 St:  in both directions}

125 St:

Malcom X Blvd:

Lexington Av:

116 St:

106 St:

96 St:

86 St:

72 St:

55 St:

42 St:

34 St:

23 St:

14 St:

2 Av:

Pitt St

Union Av:

Humboldt St

Myrtle Av:  

Bergen St

Fulton St:

St Johns Pl

Eastern Pkwy:  

Empire Blvd

Church Av

Kings Hwy

Flatlands Av

Kings Plaza

 

 

 

 

[T to Dyre Avenue]

6 hours ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Guess I'll clarify a little bit. 

1. Think about this. By the time Phase 3 ever gets built, there will be a very high chance that all 75 Footers would be retired and be replaced by newer (60 foot) equipment. At the same time, the idea of extending platforms (and consolidating stations) on the BMT Eastern Division is one that would have to be implemented in order for this reroute to work. Even without Phase 3 and the idea I pit up, I think expanding the BMT Eastern Division would be beneficial not only in the long term, but in the short term as well. 

3. The  would run between Bay Ridge and (an expanded) Essex Street. During the evenings and overnight, trains could deadhead to ENY Yard, (which i also recommend expanding to fit longer trains). 

5. I guess but given the considerable amount of Distance between Broadway and 2nd Avenue in Manhattan, there wouldn't much of a reason to deinterline DeKalb now. 

6. I understand your concern over the , but if that's the case, might as well reroute it to Astoria and fold the into the . A nice little bonus is that an running from Astoria-Euclid would still have Yard Access to Pitkin. And then maybe something else could run in place of the  on Queens Blvd, Maybe a  Train, but doing that would force you to deinterline CPW/8th Avenue. 

If you want, I can make a map to clear things up. 

 

True, any plan to reroute the  and  to Williamsburg will certainly happen after the R68/68A cars are retired and replaced by 60-footers (long after). But they’ll still have to extend Eastern Division platforms for 10-car trains. Might as well expand Essex into a station with four tracks.

I feel like an  service from Astoria to Euclid Avenue would be a more reliable service than the current , especially if it doesn’t have half a dozen or more merges.   

4 hours ago, Vulturious said:

Interesting, weird how you have the  running via Concourse and replacing  trains. I highly doubt that would happen since  trains have been running via Concourse for a very long time just for it to be swapped out and you also have  trains based out of 207th Street when it's running via Concourse. Unless you plan on having  trains based out of Concourse, there is no reason to have it based out of 207th. There still need to be a lot of modifications to the rest of Jamaica El line as well as Myrtle Av line because of how tight the curves are and there isn't any express between Broadway Junction and Jamaica Center. 

1.) Yeah I completely agree with modifying BMT Eastern Division, the curves, short stations, as well as not having a third track for express service between Broadway Junction and Jamaica Center. It won't really benefit Midtown as well as Uptown and Bronx riders to ride trains that aren't full length 10 car size. It worked for the  because it's local all the way and people would rather ride an express train rather taking local which is longer travel time.

3.) By expanded, you mean by having another platform dedicated to terminating  trains? I'm assuming this is what you mean. That isn't a bad idea, but there needs to be some sort of express service which the  can help with being local and the  running express.

5.) Obviously there wouldn't because there isn't any 6th Av train running at all in South Brooklyn anymore, now I just realized which train is going to run via 4th Av and which is running Brighton?

6.) That's a really good idea since that would mean less train lines that are based out of Coney Island. CIY would have to only deal with the , , , and  trains. I don't know if  trains would be rerouted in this scenario to 2nd Av, but I think it's best to keep  trains at Astoria, but instead of switching at 34 St-Herald Square, have it switch at 57 St-7 Av. There is probably going to be less service provided at Astoria so keeping an express service at Astoria wouldn't be as bad.

I don't really need a map, but I would like it to see how you plan on having the service run.

I’m not a huge fan of rerouting the  to The Bronx in place of the . I mean, if they wanted to switch back the ‘s and ’s northern terminals (undoing the 1998 swap) so there can be both 6th and 8th Ave services in The Bronx, I’d be ok with that. 

I’d prefer to see the  go to 2nd Ave, although if we ever get to Phase 3, then that could be a problem as it would be extremely difficult to fit ,  and  service between 63rd and 125th streets. If the  stays in Astoria, then we’ll be stuck with it merging with the  and delaying the Broadway Line, even if the merge is moved from 34th to 57th.

Edited September 3, 2020 by T to Dyre Avenue

[Armandito]

125th Street crosstown subway to Queens: https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1w2lqB-KVq0M_l10CAMNH54AScEDnhfBR&ll=40.78670813304815%2C-73.88107114999998&z=11