How Will SAS Restructure the Broadway Line

[Roadcruiser1]

Here is a better idea add more trains have it go to whitehall full-time drop the it's a lost cause replace with extended in brooklyn and in queens upgraded for manhattan and boosted would eliminate the switching delays between the broadway lines. Extending the would have it still shorter than many lines as the will go from 30 stations to 46 which is still less than other lines. At rush hour the would be at 37 total route. The combined skip-stop service would slash 4th ave local wait times and replace the horrible with something more reliable huge portions of the are only served by the meaning few merges. Skip-stop service won't change for no extension just add service to counter the complaints.

Broadway local would be better served with one frequent excellent line than 2 shitty ones. Sadly in some cases merges are unavoidable such as the and now I am curious how do the and say 6th ave lines with all the services interfacing stay on time? I heard the was reliable but it's under served and the brighton line sucks.

The service is horrible. Another way can be to truncate the R at whitehall boost it's service and extend the J to bay ridge.  Something as the R is horrid.

 

Skip stop has nothing to do with stations, but with timing. .

 

Also your idea to eliminate the is terrible. . Please think before saying something stupid. .

[NewFlyer 230]

Here is a better idea add more trains have it go to whitehall full-time drop the it's a lost cause replace with extended in brooklyn and in queens upgraded for manhattan and boosted would eliminate the switching delays between the broadway lines. Extending the would have it still shorter than many lines as the will go from 30 stations to 46 which is still less than other lines. At rush hour the would be at 37 total route. The combined skip-stop service would slash 4th ave local wait times and replace the horrible with something more reliable huge portions of the are only served by the meaning few merges. Skip-stop service won't change for no extension just add service to counter the complaints.

Broadway local would be better served with one frequent excellent line than 2 shitty ones. Sadly in some cases merges are unavoidable such as the and now I am curious how do the and say 6th ave lines with all the services interfacing stay on time? I heard the was reliable but it's under served and the brighton line sucks.

The service is horrible. Another way can be to truncate the R at whitehall boost it's service and extend the J to bay ridge. Something as the R is horrid.

No bro.

Just because something is not the best doesn't mean you should get rid of it. Leave the alone and keep the from entering in Brooklyn a second time. If the MTA wanted the to go to Brooklyn they will do it but most likely you will see the same from 2004-2010 restored

[4P3607]

I remember reading somewhere about a split service once 2nd Avenue opens, having two North terminals at Ditmars and 96, similar to how the is split between Lefferts and The Rockaways today. service would be doubled; Instead of having trains on the , those sets would run on the instead. 

 

Again, that's just an idea that I read about a while back. Most likely service will just return, just like how it was before the 2010 service cuts. 

 

Then again, knowing how the MTA changes their mind at the last minute sometimes, the best answer is probably to wait and see how things turn out. 

[Kamen Rider]

They didn't just slap on random terminals like the to Far Rockaway,

 

no, they actually, kinda did exactly that. it's programed for nearly every possible routing a particular line could take. The limit's are probably based around how much memory the system has.  

 

As a Broadway Q to Far Rockaway is impossible, it probably won't show in the system. But there are probably dozens of route possibilities that Q could take. There is a program for a Q to Whitehall. there are at least three programs that involve SAS built in.

[Wallyhorse]

Here is a better idea add more N trains have it go to whitehall full-time drop the R it's a lost cause replace with extended J in brooklyn and G in queens upgraded N for manhattan and boosted Q would eliminate the switching delays between the broadway lines. Extending the J would have it still shorter than many lines as the J will go from 30 stations to 46 which is still less than other lines. At rush hour the J/Z would be at 37 total route. The combined skip-stop service would slash 4th ave local wait times and replace the horrible R with something more reliable huge portions of the J are only served by the J meaning few merges. Skip-stop service won't change for no extension just add J service to counter the complaints.

Broadway local would be better served with one frequent excellent line than 2 shitty ones. Sadly in some cases merges are unavoidable such as the A and D now I am curious how do the A D and say 6th ave lines with all the services interfacing stay on time? I heard the D was reliable but it's under served and the brighton line sucks.

The service is horrible. Another way can be to truncate the R at whitehall boost it's service and extend the J to bay ridge.  Something as the R is horrid.

I discussed what I would do with the situation in the thread where NYC Pols want the R audited where I have my plan to keep the R, but supplement it with a new train.

 

As for what happens when the SAS comes, the LAST thing I would do is send the to Brooklyn.  I have in the past (mainly in my ideas for a revived Rockaway Beach Branch) thought of perhaps having the and the swap Brooklyn terminals (since the has Concourse Yard) with the going back to being the 24/7 line to Astoria while the would also be going to Astoria from 5:30 AM-11:30 PM on weekdays while remaining express in Manhattan.  It might even have to be looked as a three-way switch where the replaces the on 95th, the moves to the Brighton Line (and run in Brooklyn like the used to until 1986) and the goes to the West End. The likely would run Whitehall-71st Continental to replace the on QB 18/7 OR 18/5 with the re-routed on weekends to 71-Continental to replace the on weekends (and possibly also running late nights seven days a week to 71-Continental that would allow the to return to being an express on QB 24/7).

 

A D/R Brooklyn swap would require the and to switch tracks at 59th Street since the would be the 4th Avenue local OR with the becoming the local and stopping at DeKalb Avenue (and the remaining express with the joining it at 36th).  That might not be too bad, but it shows why someone should have thought of finding a way to be able to connect the tracks from 95th Street to the express without switching when it was originally built.

 

Not perfect by any means.

 

[chenvinny54]

Ok we all know that the will be extended to 96th St when the first phase complete, however this will probably cause the to be reinstated along with other changes.

 

Here is what my theory is on what will happen

Astoria to Coney Island

- It will return to being the Broadway Express

- It will join the express tracks @ 57th instead of 34th

- Unaffected in Brooklyn

 

96th St to Coney Island

- New Terminal @ 96th st

- Remains express in Manhattan

- Remains local in Brooklyn

- Skips 49th st

 

Forest Hills to Bay Ridge

- Unchanged route

 

* Astoria to Bay Parkway

* - North Terminal in Astoria w/ train

* - South Terminal at former terminal in Brooklyn

* - supplements in Brooklyn

* - More riders to/from the south on Brooklyn side

 

* My main theory nothing to confirm it

Okay. Wait, the supposed to run express meanwhile runs local because the heading southbound in Brooklyn finishes its trip at Brighton Beach, and ends longer trip to Coney Island. This arrangement is like ends in Brooklyn Bridge City Hall meanwhile and continues southbound.

So that customers can get to coney island quicker. Think that you are lining up as Thr Haven customer as you are boarding on the Norwegian Breakaway. As you line up to get on the ship, what if the regular onboard passengers can get straight to the ship via priority line while one of the Havens customer lined up on the regular line around 2 hours, after of course they paid a bigger fare than the regular? That might be unfair, that Haven might asks for a refund.

That means according to this proposal, to show that is fair, in Brooklyn is queuing on the "The Haven" priority line, making just express stops and is on the "regular" line, making local stops.

[RollOver]

Dude, you know this would just result in switching delays at Brighton Beach during rush hours when the and each run more frequently at 6-8 minute headways because there's no relay west of the station for the to relay, right? And even if there was, there would still be delays because trains terminating at Brighton Beach have to use the express track and trains continuing through the station have to use the local track.

 

That particular setup is unnecessary. The is the full-time local on the Brighton Line for ridership and operational reasons. You gotta keep it simple with the current setup.

[Lordsaitamaboss]

Skip stop has nothing to do with stations, but with timing. .

 

Also your idea to eliminate the is terrible. . Please think before saying something stupid. .

I know I will look elsewhere but how else will the broadway line have space to boost reliability?

Dude, you know this would just result in switching delays at Brighton Beach during rush hours when the and each run more frequently at 6-8 minute headways because there's no relay west of the station for the to relay, right? And even if there was, there would still be delays because trains terminating at Brighton Beach have to use the express track and trains continuing through the station have to use the local track.

 

That particular setup is unnecessary. The is the full-time local on the Brighton Line for ridership and operational reasons. You gotta keep it simple with the current setup.

can't select peak express trains extend to coney island? To close gaps and boost reliability.

 

No bro.

Just because something is not the best doesn't mean you should get rid of it. Leave the alone and keep the from entering in Brooklyn a second time. If the MTA wanted the to go to Brooklyn they will do it but most likely you will see the same from 2004-2010 restored

Ok then have the go full time express but from 57th to reduce interrupting the then add additional can that help reliability?

[RollOver]

can't select peak express trains extend to coney island? To close gaps and boost reliability.

 

If it works for you and him, then go ahead I guess. I mean the extra rush hour express trains are actually put-ins and put-outs from the Coney Island yard anyway.

[RailRunRob]

Here is a better idea add more N trains have it go to whitehall full-time drop the R it's a lost cause replace with extended J in brooklyn and G in queens upgraded N for manhattan and boosted Q would eliminate the switching delays between the broadway lines. Extending the J would have it still shorter than many lines as the J will go from 30 stations to 46 which is still less than other lines. At rush hour the Z J would be at 37 total route. The combined skip-stop service would slash 4th ave local wait times and replace the horrible R with something more reliable huge portions of the J are only served by the J meaning few merges. Skip-stop service won't change for no extension just add J service to counter the complaints.

Broadway local would be better served with one frequent excellent line than 2 shitty ones. Sadly in some cases merges are unavoidable such as the A and D now I am curious how do the A/D and say 6th ave lines with all the services interfacing stay on time? I heard the D was reliable but it's under served and the brighton line sucks.

The service is horrible. Another way can be to truncate the R at whitehall boost it's service and extend the J to bay ridge.  Something as the R is horrid.

I'm confused what are we basing this off of? Railroad management doesn't work in this way at least the way I learnt. I guess the first thing I would be asking is what the capacity guidelines are and what the current peaks are. Just looking at the schedule for both the ( J) and . might have more capacity in peak directions but overall  the capacity is about 11% more just based on scheduling at the peaks.

Headways 6-8 mins for the and 5 Mins at peak and 8 mins in non peak directions. Based on top of the hour departures.

 

R peak service (best case)

6 min headways   (10 trains per hour @1,160 passengers per train) 11,600 per hour at peak. (both ways)

00

06

18

24

30

36

42

48

54

 

J/Z skipstop (Peak) (12 trains per hour @1,040 passengers per train) 12,480 per hour at peak (Peak direction) +7.051% 

5 mins headways

00

05

10

15

20

25

30

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

 

J non peak 8 TPH (8,320 Passengers per Hour.)

 

Bi directional capacity

 

23,200 per hour capacity at peak   +11.5% More

20,800 per hour capacity at peak (J/Z and J)

 

How I look at Railroad management scheduling and management.

 -Track capacity being that the top and then working with in the box.

 -Creating service guidelines ,capacity guidelines rolling stock assignment?

The just using 75ft rolling stock 120-130 more people can fit per train x that by the hour. If im looking at it this way the MTA has to be. all these things factor in. Sorry for asking some of these questions I'm just trying to get an idea of some of the point of views. I can submit could be something on my end im not getting.

[R32 3838]

The to 9th ave would make more sense

 

The to bay parkway is abit too much plus it would still share tracks with the , if there's enough equipment then it would be logical but I doubt the would go that far, Whitehall seems to be a better terminal

[RailRunRob]

The to 9th ave would make more sense

 

The to bay parkway is abit too much plus it would still share tracks with the , if there's enough equipment then it would be logical but I doubt the would go that far, Whitehall seems to be a better terminal

That makes more sense adding the in addition to the the ridership along 4th Ave especially north of 36th street has risen. Anyone know the capacity guidelines breakdown for the MTA?

[chenvinny54]

Dude, you know this would just result in switching delays at Brighton Beach during rush hours when the and each run more frequently at 6-8 minute headways because there's no relay west of the station for the to relay, right? And even if there was, there would still be delays because trains terminating at Brighton Beach have to use the express track and trains continuing through the station have to use the local track.

 

That particular setup is unnecessary. The is the full-time local on the Brighton Line for ridership and operational reasons. You gotta keep it simple with the current setup.

Yeah i understand that. But sometimes i experienced last year that train had ran express and ran local due to the track circumstances. How they done that, then that must be my proposal.

[chenvinny54]

Dude, you know this would just result in switching delays at Brighton Beach during rush hours when the and each run more frequently at 6-8 minute headways because there's no relay west of the station for the to relay, right? And even if there was, there would still be delays because trains terminating at Brighton Beach have to use the express track and trains continuing through the station have to use the local track.

 

That particular setup is unnecessary. The is the full-time local on the Brighton Line for ridership and operational reasons. You gotta keep it simple with the current setup.

And also im really really sorry to tell you this. Regarding to Weekend schedules of the , since the local dont operate on the Brighton Line, the will run local. I hope this dont give any problems.

[Javier]

Waaaaaaaaaaait a minute everyone.

 

The pre-2010 used to have select put-in's from Coney Island and Gravesend - 86 St when the gets rerouted via Bridge in the morning am I correct? Instead of all this chaos, have some trains drop out at City Hall, have some be extended via Sea Beach to 86 St, and have the rest terminate at Whitehall. This way you don't interfere with normal service.

[Fresh Pond]

Waaaaaaaaaaait a minute everyone.The pre-2010 used to have select put-in's from Coney Island and Gravesend - 86 St when the gets rerouted via Bridge in the morning am I correct? Instead of all this chaos, have some trains drop out at City Hall, have some be extended via Sea Beach to 86 St, and have the rest terminate at Whitehall. This way you don't interfere with normal service.

They did that because there isn't enough room to lay-up all those trains at City Hall at nights & weekends.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Extending the to Brooklyn will not happen unless if you kill the , because doing so will make skip stop service impossible hence you will get the residents along the B.M.T. Jamaica, and Myrtle Avenue Lines to skin you alive.

  

Not true at all. You could extend both the and trains to 95th & 4th and still keep skip-stop service on the Jamaica Ave el, as well as peak-direction express service on the Broadway el. Both J and Z would still have the same terminals. The only difference would be that the southern terminal would be further south. By truncating the at Whitehall, you eliminate any potential delays that would result from trains regularly merging before entering the Montague Tunnel.

No bro.

Just because something is not the best doesn't mean you should get rid of it. Leave the alone and keep the from entering in Brooklyn a second time. If the MTA wanted the to go to Brooklyn they will do it but most likely you will see the same from 2004-2010 restored

Leaving the alone is not going to change all the service problems that its riders currently have to suffer through. At least if the and replace the R in south Brooklyn, that may, at the very least, allow the R to recover more quickly from a service delay. I also question the concern about the J/Z being a "ridiculously long local route". It's been said on here that the is faster from Jamaica Center to Chambers St than the is to WTC. If so, then imagine how much faster the Z would be if you took that same E to Queens Plaza and transferred to the R for City Hall. And the J and Z don't merge and un-merge with so many other train lines like the R does.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

I discussed what I would do with the situation in the thread where NYC Pols want the R audited where I have my plan to keep the R, but supplement it with a new train.

As for what happens when the SAS comes, the LAST thing I would do is send the J to Brooklyn. I have in the past (mainly in my ideas for a revived Rockaway Beach Branch) thought of perhaps having the R and the D swap Brooklyn terminals (since the D has Concourse Yard) with the R going back to being the 24/7 line to Astoria while the N would also be going to Astoria from 5:30 AM-11:30 PM on weekdays while remaining express in Manhattan. It might even have to be looked as a three-way switch where the D replaces the R on 95th, the R moves to the Brighton Line (and run in Brooklyn like the M used to until 1986) and the Q goes to the West End. The W likely would run Whitehall-71st Continental to replace the R on QB 18/7 OR 18/5 with the N re-routed on weekends to 71-Continental to replace the W on weekends (and possibly also running late nights seven days a week to 71-Continental that would allow the E to return to being an express on QB 24/7).

A D/R Brooklyn swap would require the D and N to switch tracks at 59th Street since the N would be the 4th Avenue local OR with the D becoming the local and stopping at DeKalb Avenue (and the N remaining express with the Q joining it at 36th). That might not be too bad, but it shows why someone should have thought of finding a way to be able to connect the tracks from 95th Street to the express without switching when it was originally built.

Not perfect by any means.

 

Nowhere near perfect is more like it! How in the hell is this ridiculous and unnecessarily complicated plan better than just extending the to 95th in place of the (which would be truncated at Whitehall)? And don't say it's because the J would be too long of a route. The current R isn't much shorter (if it is) and it certainly isn't faster.

The to 9th ave would make more sense

The to bay parkway is abit too much plus it would still share tracks with the , if there's enough equipment then it would be logical but I doubt the would go that far, Whitehall seems to be a better terminal

That makes more sense adding the in addition to the the ridership along 4th Ave especially north of 36th street has risen. Anyone know the capacity guidelines breakdown for the MTA?

I don't think the or or any other line should terminate at 9th Avenue. It's not a very busy station. And it's the 4th Avenue local stations south of 36th St that are seeing increased ridership more so than those north of 36th. The 's own stats will show that. Any train that terminates at 9th Ave or Bay Pkwy (West End) will not be able to serve those busier stations, while serving the less-busy stations north of 36th St. On the other hand, a extended to Bay Ridge just duplicates the and would be subject to any of the same delays the R would experience in Manhattan.

[Lordsaitamaboss]

The to 9th ave would make more sense

 

The to bay parkway is abit too much plus it would still share tracks with the , if there's enough equipment then it would be logical but I doubt the would go that far, Whitehall seems to be a better terminal

That would make zero sense whatsoever the problems with the 4th ave line are worst south of 36th street a 9th ave terminal is a complete waste and would only interrupt the reliability of the and the is utterly useless and does nothing to solve the problems with the in fact it would make them worse making 4th ave local service even worse. The needs not return the simply needs more service as does the queens blvd local and broadway local and 4th ave locals which have horrible service.

 

Lolwut?

Allow me to simplify it for you the is heavily unreliable with multiple merges between multiple lines. The do not have such massive delays nor do they have the constant merges with other lines. So to spare the 4th ave local from that disaster the gets eliminated from brooklyn and replaced with enhanced service sparing poor soles from the extreme wait times. 

 

Either by truncating the at whitehall or routing upgraded service through downtown at the 's expense the end result in both scenarios  is more consistent and frequent service for the broadway line express via either upgraded or express and boosted . 

 

Was that simple enough for you.

 

The super simple version: Unreliable line replaced by more reliable line additional service added to the reliable line. Shortened unreliable line becomes more reliable due to boosted recovery time. Or reliable line mostly separated from others replaces manhattan service on the unreliable line.

 

That makes more sense adding the in addition to the the ridership along 4th Ave especially north of 36th street has risen. Anyone know the capacity guidelines breakdown for the MTA?

So basically your saying FU to bay ridge riders ok.

[RailRunRob]

That would make zero sense whatsoever the problems with the 4th ave line are worst south of 36th street a 9th ave terminal is a complete waste and would only interrupt the reliability of the and the is utterly useless and does nothing to solve the problems with the in fact it would make them worse making 4th ave local service even worse. The needs not return the simply needs more service as does the queens blvd local and broadway local and 4th ave locals which have horrible service.

 

Allow me to simplify it for you the is heavily unreliable with multiple merges between multiple lines. The do not have such massive delays nor do they have the constant merges with other lines. So to spare the 4th ave local from that disaster the gets eliminated from brooklyn and replaced with enhanced service sparing poor soles from the extreme wait times. 

 

Either by truncating the at whitehall or routing upgraded service through downtown at the 's expense the end result in both scenarios  is more consistent and frequent service for the broadway line express via either upgraded or express and boosted . 

 

Was that simple enough for you.

 

The super simple version: Unreliable line replaced by more reliable line additional service added to the reliable line. Shortened unreliable line becomes more reliable due to boosted recovery time. Or reliable line mostly separated from others replaces manhattan service on the unreliable line.

 

So basically your saying FU to bay ridge riders ok.

Where's the info that says that trains are overcapacity coming from BayRidge? That's why I asked for the capacity guidelines. It's getting harder to differentiate from comments that come from a point of improvement. And people that would just think it's cool to see a train run a different route. I saw significant ridership gains along fourth Ave in the Parkslope area all based off of the MTA's data I could be wrong but I'm open to corrections. I'll be more than happy to post the sources.

[Lordsaitamaboss]

Where's the info that says that trains are overcapacity coming from BayRidge? That's why I asked for the capacity guidelines. It's getting harder to differentiate from comments that come from a point of improvement. And people that would just think it's cool to see a train run a different route. I saw significant ridership gains along fourth Ave in the Parkslope area all based off of the MTA's data I could be wrong but I'm open to corrections. I'll be more than happy to post the sources.

Ok but based on experience the waits easily go beyond 10 minutes. The infrequent service is made worse by the horrid reliability of the . It is high time the got the boot from brooklyn it is an abomination it makes the look awesome that is hard to do. The is the worst line in brooklyn the would liberate those poor saps from the 20 to 30 minute circus show waits on the . That line has failed brooklynites. Almost anybody who rides it will tell you how bad it is. The only problem with the is frequency it's reliability is nowhere near as bad as the . Basically in bay ridge gives riders something less awful more frequent service means the express trains won't have to hold as often which means delays made worse by the length of those lines.

[Fresh Pond]

Allow me to simplify it for you the is heavily unreliable with multiple merges between multiple lines. The do not have such massive delays nor do they have the constant merges with other lines. So to spare the 4th ave local from that disaster the gets eliminated from brooklyn and replaced with enhanced service sparing poor soles from the extreme wait times.

 

Either by truncating the at whitehall or routing upgraded service through downtown at the 's expense the end result in both scenarios is more consistent and frequent service for the broadway line express via either upgraded or express and boosted .

 

Was that simple enough for you.

 

The super simple version: Unreliable line replaced by more reliable line additional service added to the reliable line. Shortened unreliable line becomes more reliable due to boosted recovery time. Or reliable line mostly separated from others replaces manhattan service on the unreliable line.

 

Sending the down to Bay Ridge isn't gonna solve anything. All you're doing is moving one problem to another line. The already went to 95 St after 9/11, and that made it the longest local line running, longer than the already unreliable .

 

Plus, I'm pretty sure people along 4 Av is not gonna be okay with a shortened train running along their line.

 

...your posting style looks familiar...someone that got banned a while back

[Roadcruiser1]

Another issue with extending the , and the is that if you do you have to pull out the , and that leaves southwest Brooklyn without access to Midtown along with cutting the 4th Avenue Local access to Midtown. . That would not be popular across the board. . People down here want access to Chinatown, and 34th Street. .

[Lordsaitamaboss]

Another issue with extending the , and the is that if you do you have to pull out the , and that leaves southwest Brooklyn without access to Midtown along with cutting the 4th Avenue Local access to Midtown. . That would not be popular across the board. . People down here want access to Chinatown, and 34th Street. .

The goes to midtown it's called cross the platform transfer which is what most people already do. The does it better as does the 4th ave express. So what if the is pulled out of brooklyn it's utterly useless. The end result is shorter wait times at local stations and with that means easier switching to the which go directly to chinatown and midtown. The is a feeder the would be a better feeder. Very few ride the all the way to midtown from south brooklyn almost none.

 

Sending the down to Bay Ridge isn't gonna solve anything. All you're doing is moving one problem to another line. The already went to 95 St after 9/11, and that made it the longest local line running, longer than the already unreliable .

 

Plus, I'm pretty sure people along 4 Av is not gonna be okay with a shortened train running along their line.

 

..

I will calm down the run time may be longer but there is fewer switching on the and sharing with other lines. The doesn't have the queens blvd line bottlenecks or the issue of getting stiffed by the 34th switching and other related delays. This means more consistent service for the 4th ave local. The riders for downtown and midtown won't be fazed as the downtown riders would walk while midtown and others would continue to transfer at 36th, 59th, and pacific street like they do now. Every time I am at that platform and an and express train arrive many switch between both trains.

[B46 via Utica]

Well Damn I Dont know when this turned to the train audit thread but here is my two cents. Just boost train service and fix the schedule for the thing that's all you really need to do the or don't need to be extended you will be making them completely unreliable they should also reroute the through 63 st with the so it doesn't have to merge with the and at the 60 st tube.