Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[cl94]

The R179's and R188's. Maybe i'm just not happy that the bullets are no longer part of the train in their correct form, but I like the R32, R42, R46, etc. Maybe I don't know finances as well as I should regarding the , but I do know those cars can be cleaned, upgraded, etc. I know the newer cars have automatic announcements and better seating, but there's no reason to get rid of all of them. 

 

As for the Franklin Shuttle, I was on the platform and a guy thought I had an issue with him and carried it much further. When I actually got in the train, a different guy thought I was looking at him(totally f**ked if you know what I mean). His buddy had to step in to calm that down. It's my only ride on there, but it wasn't pleasant and didn't look like the greatest area, anyway.

 

New cars are needed, end of story. Especially if they're putting CBTC on every line in the next 20-30 years. The R32s have been around for 50 years. This isn't the Pyongyang Metro, where every train is older than dirt and covered in it. America's signature city should be keeping with the times. They're preserving cars and we'll see them again. Heck, they have stuff in the Transit Museum from the early days and we can still ride some of it through the system on fan trips. Think about it: the R32s have been running for over half of the time the IND has been in existence. They're older than most of us on the forums. I love them, but they're really showing their age. I rode the a couple months ago and they were looking really distressed. If they run for too long, our fond memories will be soured.

[StevenFrancis]

I would propse this for the Second Avenue Subway

Since this thread is one of the few threads that allow me to foam without criticism, here's what I would propose:

I would propose two routings

After 116th Street:

One will stop at 125th Street-Lexington Avenue (ADA accessible with transfers to , M60 to LaGuardia Airport)

One out of every four trains will only serve this station on weekdays, other times, the will handle service here.

 

The second will run via Amtrak's Northeast Corridor following an earlier plan, this one will be known as the Corridor Line making stops at:

Willow Avenue / East 135th Street (ADA accessible)

Leggett Avenue / Bruckner Boulevard

Lafayette Avenue / Bruckner Boulevard

Tiffany Street / Bruckner Boulevard

Hunts Point Avenue / Bruckner Boulevard (ADA accessible with a transfer to at Hunts Point Avenue)

Westchester Avenue / Sheridan Expressway (transfer to at Whitlock Avenue with a reopening of the old NYW&B station house)

174th Street / Bronx River Avenue

East Tremont Avenue / East 180th Street

White Plains/Unionport Roads / East Tremont Avenue (ADA accessible)

Bronxdale Avenue / Sackett Avenue

Williamsbridge Road / Sackett Avenue

Pelham - Hutchinson Parkways / Stillwell Avenue & Hutchinson Metro Center

Erskine Place / Hunter Avenue

Bay Plaza / The Mall at Bay Plaza (ADA accessible with transfer to Bx12 Select Bus Service)

This line will see frequent and constant service.

Edited April 18, 2014 by StevenFrancis

[CenSin]

They've been talking about linking Staten Island since the days of the Dual Contracts. Tunnel approaches sort of already exist, but the biggest problem is figuring out how you would get additional trains using the 4th Av express tracks through DeKalb. If there was a way to directly link DeKalb's inner express tracks to Montague, it would be perfect as you could have a Staten Island express to Chambers St, but the actual logistics of it would be a bit tricky.

If they split up 4 Avenue further, service in Brooklyn will be totally *&^%ed. Service to Staten Island will definitely siphon up at least half the capacity on 4 Avenue given that it will be the only subway line to a borough that's comparable in size to Brooklyn (58 square miles versus 71 square miles). Staten Island doesn't only deserve its own trunk line if it gets a line, but it will need it.

 

Perhaps it should be done this way anyway. And then when capacity constraints make themselves known to all, the politicians will see a real need and ferverent demand to divert Staten Island traffic to a dedicated tunnel (maybe under or over 3 Avenue in Brooklyn). What they need to do to connect that to Manhattan would then be obvious: they have an incomplete 2 Avenue and a new Brooklyn trunk that needs a Manhattan connection. The DeKalb Avenue junction certainly isn't going to volunteer for it.

[Union Tpke]

New cars are needed, end of story. Especially if they're putting CBTC on every line in the next 20-30 years. The R32s have been around for 50 years. This isn't the Pyongyang Metro, where every train is older than dirt and covered in it. America's signature city should be keeping with the times. They're preserving cars and we'll see them again. Heck, they have stuff in the Transit Museum from the early days and we can still ride some of it through the system on fan trips. Think about it: the R32s have been running for over half of the time the IND has been in existence. They're older than most of us on the forums. I love them, but they're really showing their age. I rode the a couple months ago and they were looking really distressed. If they run for too long, our fond memories will be soured.

I know that they will need to go, but they are my favorite cars and will always be my favorite cars. I hope that they can live as long as possible. I rode on a set today and took pics and I saw the expected wrong rollsign. It was a diamond C, (Concourse)

[bobtehpanda]

The R179's and R188's. Maybe i'm just not happy that the bullets are no longer part of the train in their correct form, but I like the R32, R42, R46, etc. Maybe I don't know finances as well as I should regarding the , but I do know those cars can be cleaned, upgraded, etc. I know the newer cars have automatic announcements and better seating, but there's no reason to get rid of all of them. 

 

As for the Franklin Shuttle, I was on the platform and a guy thought I had an issue with him and carried it much further. When I actually got in the train, a different guy thought I was looking at him(totally f**ked if you know what I mean). His buddy had to step in to calm that down. It's my only ride on there, but it wasn't pleasant and didn't look like the greatest area, anyway.

 

The average lifespan of a car is 40 or 50 years. The R32s are well past their prime (and it shows, considering how often the AC/doors/etc are malfunctioning on those things from day to day). At some point it costs more money to maintain than it does to replace. The R188 order exists only for the purpose of giving the its new signalling system, which would be very hard to do in an R62 that was never designed for it.

 

Keep in mind that the new cars have one big advantage over the old ones; their doors are significantly wider, which means that more people can get in/out. They're also all designed to eventually fit CBTC, which will be useful as work begins on Queens Blvd and whatever else they've got in store for CBTC.

[lupojohn]

The average lifespan of a car is 40 or 50 years. The R32s are well past their prime (and it shows, considering how often the AC/doors/etc are malfunctioning on those things from day to day). At some point it costs more money to maintain than it does to replace. The R188 order exists only for the purpose of giving the its new signalling system, which would be very hard to do in an R62 that was never designed for it.

 

Keep in mind that the new cars have one big advantage over the old ones; their doors are significantly wider, which means that more people can get in/out. They're also all designed to eventually fit CBTC, which will be useful as work begins on Queens Blvd and whatever else they've got in store for CBTC.

The only part of this i'll comment on is the doors. If, as I saw here, all lines inevitably run these, I don't want more people getting in. There's enough crowding on a line like the . Trains are never supposed to be as crowded as they are. I want my car to be empty enough where I can sit comfortably rather than be squeezing in(mind you this is after I get a seat and I have people sit on both sides of me), so those wider doors are not to my liking.

[RollOver]

Let's say this:

 

-Each 60 feet car being crowded with 128 people

-Each 75 feet car being crowded with 180 people (all R68 and R68As, but only for the "A" cabs via an R46) or 192 people ("B" cabs via an R46)

-Each 51 feet car being crowded with 112 people

 

As long as you're able to fit onto what I just listen above, then what's the big deal? Trains and buses aren't ghost towns. Keeping them crowded saves enough money for many reasons that you (lupojohn) should consider, like say: future projects, new trains, new buses etc. I know I can be wrong though.

 

However, if the decided to run many more service than what ridership levels require, well, then that's terribly irresponsible and I personally wouldn't really respect them as much for that. If you want a much less crowded train, there's always the , shorten , Rock Park Shuttle and at times the and  . Trains and buses will always be crowded no matter what, and if you don't like it, then don't ride them.

Edited April 19, 2014 by RollOverMyHead

[bobtehpanda]

The only part of this i'll comment on is the doors. If, as I saw here, all lines inevitably run these, I don't want more people getting in. There's enough crowding on a line like the . Trains are never supposed to be as crowded as they are. I want my car to be empty enough where I can sit comfortably rather than be squeezing in(mind you this is after I get a seat and I have people sit on both sides of me), so those wider doors are not to my liking.

 

The point is not getting more people in (which would be physically impossible, given that all the cars have the same basic footprint; that was poor wording on my point). The point is to allow more people to get in and out in a reduced amount of time; that way, you can shave off a few seconds here and there with more efficient boarding.

 

We're very close to hitting the amount of peak service we can reliably schedule (if we haven't hit that already) on our most crowded lines, and we have to squeeze every last bit out of these cars. The less time trains spend at stations trying to cram people in, the faster trains can get to their destination, and it adds up.

[trainfanrod]

I wonder if the is built can it be extended along the 4th ave line if possible to aid the R

[Far Rock Depot]

I would propse this for the Second Avenue Subway

Since this thread is one of the few threads that allow me to foam without criticism, here's what I would propose:

I would propose two routings

After 116th Street:

One will stop at 125th Street-Lexington Avenue (ADA accessible with transfers to , M60 to LaGuardia Airport)

One out of every four trains will only serve this station on weekdays, other times, the will handle service here.

The second will run via Amtrak's Northeast Corridor following an earlier plan, this one will be known as the Corridor Line making stops at:

Willow Avenue / East 135th Street (ADA accessible)

Leggett Avenue / Bruckner Boulevard

Lafayette Avenue / Bruckner Boulevard

Tiffany Street / Bruckner Boulevard

Hunts Point Avenue / Bruckner Boulevard (ADA accessible with a transfer to at Hunts Point Avenue)

Westchester Avenue / Sheridan Expressway (transfer to at Whitlock Avenue with a reopening of the old NYW&B station house)

174th Street / Bronx River Avenue

East Tremont Avenue / East 180th Street

White Plains/Unionport Roads / East Tremont Avenue (ADA accessible)

Bronxdale Avenue / Sackett Avenue

Williamsbridge Road / Sackett Avenue

Pelham - Hutchinson Parkways / Stillwell Avenue & Hutchinson Metro Center

Erskine Place / Hunter Avenue

Bay Plaza / The Mall at Bay Plaza (ADA accessible with transfer to Bx12 Select Bus Service)

This line will see frequent and constant service.

 

My question is, there's roughly 3-4 tracks on the NEC thru the Bronx. 2 are used for Amtrak and the others are used for freight. So my question is, where will the subway tracks go?

 

 

Sent from my Q10 using Tapatalk

 

 

[CenSin]

My question is, there's roughly 3-4 tracks on the NEC thru the Bronx. 2 are used for Amtrak and the others are used for freight. So my question is, where will the subway tracks go? Sent from my Q10 using Tapatalk

There is room for 6 tracks though. You missed that in the numerous previous discussions.

[cl94]

There is room for 6 tracks though. You missed that in the numerous previous discussions.

 

Yep. We covered this in the RX discussion. The NEC through the Bronx has room for 2 additional tracks, excluding the Hell Gate approach.

[Far Rock Depot]

And I've lived near those tracks growing up. There are spurs that will get in the way i.e. the one leading to the Hunts point Market near the Bruckner, the Oak Point yard in the south Bronx then there's the draw bridge north westchester ave. There will need to be a new bridge added there to accommodate the extra tracks. Then there's the current proposal of Metro North service there. Platforms need to be added for that service which has more of a chance happening then what's being proposed here. Let's be a little more realistic shall we? Too many factors are in play.

 

Sent from my Q10 using Tapatalk

 

 

[bobtehpanda]

And I've lived near those tracks growing up. There are spurs that will get in the way i.e. the one leading to the Hunts point Market near the Bruckner, the Oak Point yard in the south Bronx then there's the draw bridge north westchester ave. There will need to be a new bridge added there to accommodate the extra tracks. Then there's the current proposal of Metro North service there. Platforms need to be added for that service which has more of a chance happening then what's being proposed here. Let's be a little more realistic shall we? Too many factors are in play. Sent from my Q10 using Tapatalk

 

The important part is that the most expensive part of any new line, acquiring/creating a right-of-way, is already finished. It's a lot easier to widen a right of way than it is to blast through a brand-new one.

[CenSin]

The important part is that the most expensive part of any new line, acquiring/creating a right-of-way, is already finished. It's a lot easier to widen a right of way than it is to blast through a brand-new one.

It's also far easier to use what is already rail territory than to buy adjacent properties to widen a right-of-way. Edited April 24, 2014 by CenSin

[StevenFrancis]

And I've lived near those tracks growing up. There are spurs that will get in the way i.e. the one leading to the Hunts point Market near the Bruckner, the Oak Point yard in the south Bronx then there's the draw bridge north westchester ave. There will need to be a new bridge added there to accommodate the extra tracks. Then there's the current proposal of Metro North service there. Platforms need to be added for that service which has more of a chance happening then what's being proposed here. Let's be a little more realistic shall we? Too many factors are in play.

 

Sent from my Q10 using Tapatalk

Also don't forget that part of the line would still be drilled underground like from Erskine Place to Bay Plaza, also that bridge rarely opens up, if anything the MAY build new ones and the Oak Point Yard spur will get in the way but when operations are occurring, the RR services and will work something out to have smoother, less conflicting operations like building a flyover of some sort, I never said that the line had to run ENTIRELY on the ROW.

[Union Tpke]

In one of my fantasy proposals I am working on I would be making the Crosstown a major trunk line, but I have a problem, all the letters are taken up, so I will have to find some way of incorporating double letters into my plan.

[darrylbaniaga38]

The letters H, I, K, O, P, U, V, W, X, and Y are theoretically available if absolutely necessary. But, I know the MTA prefers not to use them.

[Union Tpke]

The letters H, I, K, O, P, U, V, W, X, and Y are theoretically available if absolutely necessary. But, I know the MTA prefers not to use them.

I have used em all

[Priincenene]

The letters H, I, K, O, P, U, V, W, X, and Y are theoretically available if absolutely necessary. But, I know the MTA prefers not to use them.

 

and were real but discontinued

[Fresh Pond]

H is technically used for the Rockaway shuttle

I looks like the number 1

K is free

P was planned in case of an Amtrak strike...and the resulting potty humor so they skipped it

U is free

V is free

W is free

X is free

Y is free

[bobtehpanda]

The letters H, I, K, O, P, U, V, W, X, and Y are theoretically available if absolutely necessary. But, I know the MTA prefers not to use them.

 

The only ones they absolutely refuse to use are I and O, because those look too similar to 1 and 0.

[pjbr40]

i can imagine if the Mta use (IOU) or (PU) in their bullet. lol

Edited May 9, 2014 by pjbr40

[CenSin]

The only ones they absolutely refuse to use are I and O, because those look too similar to 1 and 0.

O is only a problem because they have an internal (0) designation. Otherwise, I don't see the problem with it. When reading digits in a string of numbers aloud, O and 0 are interchangeable anyway; there is no ambiguity.

[bobtehpanda]

O is only a problem because they have an internal (0) designation. Otherwise, I don't see the problem with it. When reading digits in a string of numbers aloud, O and 0 are interchangeable anyway; there is no ambiguity.

 

The issue is reading them from far away, standing on a platform. I and O were already bad as rollsigns, but now that the front destination signs are significantly smaller, the readibility issue is even more of a problem now.

Edited May 9, 2014 by bobtehpanda