news MTA board member wants (A) to serve Rockaways only...

[checkmatechamp13]

Since this idea has come up again, I figured I might as well give my opinion on the matter. Shifting from my previous stance on the subject, I now believe it would be in everyone's best interest if the the was extended to Lefferts Blvd in lieu of the , which would be shifted entirely to the Rockaways. Let's look at the pros and cons of the proposal and the current setup with the latter first (apologies if this is repeated from elsewhere):

 

Split service between Lefferts Blvd/Rockaways

Pros:

 - direct 19/7 express service between Lefferts Blvd and Brooklyn/Manhattan

Cons:

 - very infrequent service for Rockaways/Lefferts riders

 - missed connections between , Rockaway Park shuttle

 

to Lefferts Blvd/(A) to Rockaways

Pros:

 - expanded service to both primary branches of current with reduced wait times*

 - reduced confusion on terminus of line and trains

Cons:

 - loss of one-seat express service to/from Lefferts Blvd

 

While there will likely be some who'll transfer at the first opportunity for the express, I'm sure the majority will still welcome such an improvement over the current setup. Riders shouldn't be subjugated to 15+ minute scheduled headways, even on the eastern and southern fringes of the subway. That's why after giving the whole idea some thought, I tend to lean with Checkmatechamp on this. Politicians worth their salt will push for service improvements and not the status quo, especially when it's apparent the status quo is not working for said politicians' constituents.

 

*This assumes all overall intervals across both lines remain the same and cost-neutral approaches are not taken.

 

I do agree with the general proposal, but just for the sake of neutrality, I'll add another pro/con pair:

 

With the current setup, the only have to worry about the merge east of Hoyt-Schermerhorn (westbound), and not the merge east of Euclid (eastbound). Admittedly, it wouldn't have as large of an impact on reliability, because it's towards the end of the line, and trains can be held at Euclid so passengers can make a cross-platform transfer to the train leaving first (of course, this assumes that it's announced, which often doesn't happen).

 

Another issue is that whenever that lift bridge heading out to the Rockaways is opened to allow ships to pass through, it delays trains, and all trains would be subject to those delays, instead of half being "protected" by remaining on mainland Queens. Of course, that's inherent to providing the Rockaways with more frequent service.

 

Good Break down lance and checkmate....I agree with all this about   trains going to lefferts...Its would be less confusing for riders leaving manhattan knowing all  (A)'s is for the rockaways and   's are for lefferts...I' ll Eliminate the rockaway shuttle have one seat express from that area as well as far rockaway...Late nights have a   shuttle to euclid a shuttle    to broad channel and a 24/7    207st and far rock lcl...Thats how ill do it...

 

I would consider extending the overnight to Broadway Junction via the express tracks, since it allows for a direct connection to the trains. Of course, the problem is that you would need to allocate two trainsets & crews to the overnight shuttle instead of just one.

 

This I agree with 100%.  Those who would be upset about losing their one-seat express ride from Lefferts can be placated to by having a handful of rush-hour peak-direction only trains from/to Lefferts.   That might be the compromise, especially if a second compromise is the becomes a 24/7 line and eliminates the late-night shuttle (while late nights, the becomes a combined 4 TPH line (split evenly between Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park) from the Rockaways).  

 

During rush hours, the Rockaway tends to have a decent frequency already, so you save on the costs of sending the trains the longer distance, so for cost reasons I might agree with you, but not because of some imaginary Lefferts riders that need to be "placated".

[R10 2952]

Truth be told, the IND Rockaway Line was not a worthwhile investment for the Transit Authority.  The line has always had low ridership compared to the Liberty Avenue segment; over time the operating losses got so bad that the Rockaway Line was considered a prime candidate for abandonment in 1980.

The line became what it is today because the LIRR was in dire financial straits in the early 1950s; at the time they needed to save their cash for managing larger priorities.  All this was well before the Rockefeller takeover so they were pretty much on their own- I'm pretty sure the LIRR would never have abandoned the line had the state bailed them out earlier.

 

With all the talk going on about a possible reactivation of the upper Rockaway Beach Branch, the MTA should consider converting the lower portion of the line back to LIRR and restoring the full route and connections to the Main Line, Lower Montauk, and Atlantic Branches.  That way LIRR trains from Far Rockaway would have a more direct route to Penn Station, Flatbush Terminal, and Long Island City.  The current route that reverse-loops through Nassau County and back into Queens is asinine: why the hell would you run a train in the opposite direction of its destination?

 

In fact, it would tie in perfectly with some of the current proposals to create a special discount fare within the City Terminal Zone.  Bring the fare down to the level of the CityTicket and I guarantee you Rockaway residents would be choosing commuter rail.  You'd also be permanently solving the 's terminal issues- all trains would go to Lefferts.

[Union Tpke]

When the Rockaway Drawbridge is open, trains could be turned at Howard Beach.

[checkmatechamp13]

Truth be told, the IND Rockaway Line was not a worthwhile investment for the Transit Authority.  The line has always had low ridership compared to the Liberty Avenue segment; over time the operating losses got so bad that the Rockaway Line was considered a prime candidate for abandonment in 1980.

The line became what it is today because the LIRR was in dire financial straits in the early 1950s; at the time they needed to save their cash for managing larger priorities.  All this was well before the Rockefeller takeover so they were pretty much on their own- I'm pretty sure the LIRR would never have abandoned the line had the state bailed them out earlier.

 

With all the talk going on about a possible reactivation of the upper Rockaway Beach Branch, the MTA should consider converting the lower portion of the line back to LIRR and restoring the full route and connections to the Main Line, Lower Montauk, and Atlantic Branches.  That way LIRR trains from Far Rockaway would have a more direct route to Penn Station, Flatbush Terminal, and Long Island City.  The current route that reverse-loops through Nassau County and back into Queens is asinine: why the hell would you run a train in the opposite direction of its destination?

 

In fact, it would tie in perfectly with some of the current proposals to create a special discount fare within the City Terminal Zone.  Bring the fare down to the level of the CityTicket and I guarantee you Rockaway residents would be choosing commuter rail.  You'd also be permanently solving the 's terminal issues- all trains would go to Lefferts.

 

The idea is that it's quicker to access the other villages/hamlets on that corridor (Hewlett, Cedarhurst, etc)

 

When the Rockaway Drawbridge is open, trains could be turned at Howard Beach.

 

The problem is that when the bridge opens, the trains would be on the wrong side of the bridge (they need to get to Far Rockaway to finish their trip and start their inbound trip, so what happens if they already sent that train back to Manhattan?)

[Daniel The Cool]

When the Rockaway Drawbridge is open, trains could be turned at Howard Beach.

Thats actually what they would normally do now.

[Caelestor]

Truth be told, the IND Rockaway Line was not a worthwhile investment for the Transit Authority.  The line has always had low ridership compared to the Liberty Avenue segment; over time the operating losses got so bad that the Rockaway Line was considered a prime candidate for abandonment in 1980.

The line became what it is today because the LIRR was in dire financial straits in the early 1950s; at the time they needed to save their cash for managing larger priorities.  All this was well before the Rockefeller takeover so they were pretty much on their own- I'm pretty sure the LIRR would never have abandoned the line had the state bailed them out earlier.

 

With all the talk going on about a possible reactivation of the upper Rockaway Beach Branch, the MTA should consider converting the lower portion of the line back to LIRR and restoring the full route and connections to the Main Line, Lower Montauk, and Atlantic Branches.  That way LIRR trains from Far Rockaway would have a more direct route to Penn Station, Flatbush Terminal, and Long Island City.  The current route that reverse-loops through Nassau County and back into Queens is asinine: why the hell would you run a train in the opposite direction of its destination?

 

In fact, it would tie in perfectly with some of the current proposals to create a special discount fare within the City Terminal Zone.  Bring the fare down to the level of the CityTicket and I guarantee you Rockaway residents would be choosing commuter rail.  You'd also be permanently solving the 's terminal issues- all trains would go to Lefferts.

 

To be fair, I believe that the IND wanted to take over the entire Rockaway Branch and connect the line to the QBL at Woodhaven Blvd. Lack of funds meant that only the southern portion of the line was ever connected to the Fulton St line.

 

Under the current configuration, I believe the TA intended for the Rockaway Branch to operate similarly to the Dyre Ave Line. The issue is that the only has 15 tph compared to the 25+ tph for the , so Lefferts Blvd service got shafted. The being extended to Lefferts would make that branch more similar to the to Eastchester.

[Wallyhorse]

To be fair, I believe that the IND wanted to take over the entire Rockaway Branch and connect the line to the QBL at Woodhaven Blvd. Lack of funds meant that only the southern portion of the line was ever connected to the Fulton St line.

 

Under the current configuration, I believe the TA intended for the Rockaway Branch to operate similarly to the Dyre Ave Line. The issue is that the only has 15 tph compared to the 25+ tph for the , so Lefferts Blvd service got shafted. The being extended to Lefferts would make that branch more similar to the to Eastchester.

That probably sounds correct.  The 's predecessor, the NYCTA probably wanted to take over the rest of the Rockaway Branch when the LIRR abandoned it in 1962 but did not have the money to do it at the time.   The when formed in 1968 likely didn't have the money either, even with the aggressive "Plan For Action" that was planned before the twin recessions of 1969-'75 killed any chance of that happening.

[bobtehpanda]

With all the talk going on about a possible reactivation of the upper Rockaway Beach Branch, the MTA should consider converting the lower portion of the line back to LIRR and restoring the full route and connections to the Main Line, Lower Montauk, and Atlantic Branches.  That way LIRR trains from Far Rockaway would have a more direct route to Penn Station, Flatbush Terminal, and Long Island City.  The current route that reverse-loops through Nassau County and back into Queens is asinine: why the hell would you run a train in the opposite direction of its destination?

 

LIRR service is so thin that investing in core capacity in the City would be dumb; they already have so much of it that they abandoned an entire line of it. Whatever frequency the LIRR had to offer would be very slow, and they would only be able to run a small subset of trains on it; no one from Babylon is interested in taking the scenic route through Queens when the existing route zips them straight into Jamaica and then Penn/GCT.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Truth be told, the IND Rockaway Line was not a worthwhile investment for the Transit Authority.  The line has always had low ridership compared to the Liberty Avenue segment; over time the operating losses got so bad that the Rockaway Line was considered a prime candidate for abandonment in 1980.

The line became what it is today because the LIRR was in dire financial straits in the early 1950s; at the time they needed to save their cash for managing larger priorities.  All this was well before the Rockefeller takeover so they were pretty much on their own- I'm pretty sure the LIRR would never have abandoned the line had the state bailed them out earlier.

 

With all the talk going on about a possible reactivation of the upper Rockaway Beach Branch, the MTA should consider converting the lower portion of the line back to LIRR and restoring the full route and connections to the Main Line, Lower Montauk, and Atlantic Branches.  That way LIRR trains from Far Rockaway would have a more direct route to Penn Station, Flatbush Terminal, and Long Island City.  The current route that reverse-loops through Nassau County and back into Queens is asinine: why the hell would you run a train in the opposite direction of its destination?

 

In fact, it would tie in perfectly with some of the current proposals to create a special discount fare within the City Terminal Zone.  Bring the fare down to the level of the CityTicket and I guarantee you Rockaway residents would be choosing commuter rail.  You'd also be permanently solving the 's terminal issues- all trains would go to Lefferts.

  

If the Rockaway Line service ran more frequently and had better subway and bus connections as well as a connection to a reopened Woodhaven LIRR station, then it might see better ridership numbers. Perhaps also relocate the Aqueduct Racetrack station to Linden Blvd and reroute the Q41 bus down Linden to serve the new station. More riders would take advantage of that instead of being on a Q41 that has to fight traffic on Liberty Ave to get to the Rockaway Blvd station.

 

That's also why I'm not in favor of the Rockaway Beach Branch and the existing Rockaway service going back to the LIRR. Although subway trains are not as fast as LIRR trains and have less comfortable seats, they run more frequently, cost less to ride and operate, and can offer subway and bus connections that LIRR just can't match. Even if you succeed in getting the MTA to charge CityTicket fares on Rockaway Beach LIRR trains, what about the service frequency? LIRR won't run it as frequently as Transit runs the  or  and commuters will have far less service for the ride home depending on where they got off because the Rockaway service will now be reverse-branched with Penn, GCT, Flatbush and LIC as final destinations. Depending on where you're going to, you will likely have a much longer wait. And the currently unused section of the branch would probably train frequencies of no less than once every 20-30 minutes. Not exactly an improvement over the parallel - and much more frequently running - Q11/21/52/53 services. The would run much more frequently than once every 20-30 minutes during rush hours.

 

LIRR service is so thin that investing in core capacity in the City would be dumb; they already have so much of it that they abandoned an entire line of it. Whatever frequency the LIRR had to offer would be very slow, and they would only be able to run a small subset of trains on it; no one from Babylon is interested in taking the scenic route through Queens when the existing route zips them straight into Jamaica and then Penn/GCT.

Not to mention having to build a new connecting station in Rego Park and rearranging Main Line train schedules to determine which trains will stop to connect with Rockaway trains.

[Caelestor]

  

If the Rockaway Line service ran more frequently and had better subway and bus connections as well as a connection to a reopened Woodhaven LIRR station, then it might see better ridership numbers. Perhaps also relocate the Aqueduct Racetrack station to Linden Blvd and reroute the Q41 bus down Linden to serve the new station. More riders would take advantage of that instead of being on a Q41 that has to fight traffic on Liberty Ave to get to the Rockaway Blvd station.

 

That's also why I'm not in favor of the Rockaway Beach Branch and the existing Rockaway service going back to the LIRR. Although subway trains are not as fast as LIRR trains and have less comfortable seats, they run more frequently, cost less to ride and operate, and can offer subway and bus connections that LIRR just can't match. Even if you succeed in getting the MTA to charge CityTicket fares on Rockaway Beach LIRR trains, what about the service frequency? LIRR won't run it as frequently as Transit runs the  or  and commuters will have far less service for the ride home depending on where they got off because the Rockaway service will now be reverse-branched with Penn, GCT, Flatbush and LIC as final destinations. Depending on where you're going to, you will likely have a much longer wait. And the currently unused section of the branch would probably train frequencies of no less than once every 20-30 minutes. Not exactly an improvement over the parallel - and much more frequently running - Q11/21/52/53 services. The would run much more frequently than once every 20-30 minutes during rush hours.

 

Not to mention having to build a new connecting station in Rego Park and rearranging Main Line train schedules to determine which trains will stop to connect with Rockaway trains.

 

The problem with LIRR and commuter rail in general is insane amounts of staffing. Two drivers per 10-car NYCS train isn't great, but it's better than hiring a ton of conductors to inspect every rider's tickets, which prevents headways from decreasing below 30 minutes and subsequently forces fares above $5 a ride. Moreover, the only advantage of commuter rail is speed, but it's not like the NYCS subway doesn't have fast express segments already.

 

From a metrics standpoint, the Rockaway Beach reactivation will produce minimal ridership gains compared to any phase of the SAS, assuming the Rockaways doesn't gentrify en masse if direct Midtown service is introduced. The only reason it's in the news is because Queensway wants to generate negative transportation value by coopting the corridor for a park of little utility.

[bobtehpanda]

The problem with LIRR and commuter rail in general is insane amounts of staffing. Two drivers per 10-car NYCS train isn't great, but it's better than hiring a ton of conductors to inspect every rider's tickets, which prevents headways from decreasing below 30 minutes and subsequently forces fares above $5 a ride. Moreover, the only advantage of commuter rail is speed, but it's not like the NYCS subway doesn't have fast express segments already.

 

From a metrics standpoint, the Rockaway Beach reactivation will produce minimal ridership gains compared to any phase of the SAS, assuming the Rockaways doesn't gentrify en masse if direct Midtown service is introduced. The only reason it's in the news is because Queensway wants to generate negative transportation value by coopting the corridor for a park of little utility.

 

Really, with how expensive the MTA's costs are the only metric that really matters is cost/rider; given that the SAS Phase II seems to be wildly expensive for what it is and the Rockaway Beach Branch should be much cheaper to reactivate, RBB may actually be the better project.

 

On one hand, the Q53 is already very fast, so speed gains on the subway are much less than they would be on SAS vs the M15; however, eliminating the need to use your free transfer by switching to a bus may open up more one-transfer rides to the Rockaways, enticing lots of new riders. It should also be faster going to Midtown anyways.

[R10 2952]

A subway along Rockaway Beach Branch to Queens Blvd would be problematic; in the current QBL configuration, the only way they could fit it in would be if the line terminated at the Roosevelt Avenue Terminal Station.  Which is not a great idea, seeing how insanely crowded Roosevelt Ave. gets during rush hours.

And the glorified "Queens Boulevard bypass" isn't happening anytime soon.  It's so low down on the MTA list of priorities it probably won't happen until the end of this century.

 

And have any of you ever even taken the during rush hour from the Rockaways?  I have- twice in my life during PM rush.  An absolute nightmare.  The Rockaway Line lacks the service frequencies sufficient for a subway.  Even with the LIRR frequencies, most people in Rockaway would prefer a straight shot to Penn or Flatbush instead of a subway that gives them the scenic tour of subterranean Brooklyn.  And frequencies can always be adjusted.  The LIRR's current frequencies boil down largely to their overuse of certain routes and underutilization of others. 

[bobtehpanda]

A subway along Rockaway Beach Branch to Queens Blvd would be problematic; in the current QBL configuration, the only way they could fit it in would be if the line terminated at the Roosevelt Avenue Terminal Station.  Which is not a great idea, seeing how insanely crowded Roosevelt Ave. gets during rush hours.

And the glorified "Queens Boulevard bypass" isn't happening anytime soon.  It's so low down on the MTA list of priorities it probably won't happen until the end of this century.

 

Nothing is really stopping the or the from terminating at Howard Beach if the other goes to 71st. It solves the fumigation problem quite nicely in the process.

 

Of course SAS is the number one priority and the Bypass is useless without it, but IIRC the Queens Blvd trunk line is the second busiest one after the Lex, hence why it's the first major trunk to get CBTC.

[R38 3991]

The most simple solution to this is keep everything the same Lefferts and Rockaways keeping their express services. We have one more letter on the 8th Ave line which is the unused K they should just designate every Lefferts train with the K tourist and residents would already know the A to Rockaways and the K to Lefferts and most of the time the digital signs on the R46 are broken or showing the wrong designation

 

Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk

[Wallyhorse]

The most simple solution to this is keep everything the same Lefferts and Rockaways keeping their express services. We have one more letter on the 8th Ave line which is the unused K they should just designate every Lefferts train with the K tourist and residents would already know the A to Rockaways and the K to Lefferts and most of the time the digital signs on the R46 are broken or showing the wrong designation

 

Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk

That can easily be done by extending the to Lefferts (placating pols and others by having a limited number of peak-direction trains run to/from Lefferts) and have the run on basically a 4/3 split between Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park (4 to Far Rockaway for every 3 to Rockaway Park).  Late nights, the would run 4 TPH so there would be 2 TPH from each location.  Late nights on Lefferts, the can be extended there to replace the and late-night shuttle. 

[Jemorie]

 

-____________-

 

Looks like someone has been reading this forum, or some of the facebook group posts.

 

LEAVE THE AT LEFFERTS!

 

Keep the damn where it's at, all those trains that come from The Rockaways get crowded at Rockaway Blvd as it is, could you imagine what would happen when people have to TRANSFER!?

 

i generally think the 3 branches are better off being the way they are now given that ridership and the population in the Rockaways, Broad Channel and Howard Beach are far too low for such an increase in service. the Lefferts Blvd terminal may have more ridership than the Far Rockaway terminal, but i don't think it needs that much service either.

[Lance]

That can easily be done by extending the to Lefferts (placating pols and others by having a limited number of peak-direction trains run to/from Lefferts) and have the run on basically a 4/3 split between Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park (4 to Far Rockaway for every 3 to Rockaway Park).  Late nights, the would run 4 TPH so there would be 2 TPH from each location.  Late nights on Lefferts, the can be extended there to replace the and late-night shuttle. 

Why does the need to run to Lefferts Blvd during overnight hours? Seems excessive if you ask me...

 

i generally think the 3 branches are better off being the way they are now given that ridership and the population in the Rockaways, Broad Channel and Howard Beach are far too low for such an increase in service. the Lefferts Blvd terminal may have more ridership than the Far Rockaway terminal, but i don't think it needs that much service either.

I'm not sure a lot of people would agree with that sentiment. 15-20 minute intervals at the height of the rush hour really take the "rapid" out of rapid transit and it is not a good way to run the subways, especially as we continue to see ridership growth across the board.

[Jemorie]

that is not true. the Lefferts Blvd and Far Rockaway terminals each have a train leaving once every 10 minutes during the AM Rush in addition to the 5 trains coming from the Rockaway Park terminal. Conversely, the other direction has 10-15 minute headways. In the PM Rush, frequencies are about the same 10-15 minute headways, but this time in both directions.

[Wallyhorse]

Why does the need to run to Lefferts Blvd during overnight hours? Seems excessive if you ask me...

The late nights to Lefferts would be to placate those on Lefferts who (except for a handful of peak-direction express trains) would be losing their one-seat express ride with the replacing the otherwise.  That eliminates the late-night shuttle.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

The late nights to Lefferts would be to placate those on Lefferts who (except for a handful of peak-direction express trains) would be losing their one-seat express ride with the replacing the otherwise. That eliminates the late-night shuttle.

That doesn't placate any Lefferts riders who would be upset over the loss of express service. All it does is eliminate the overnight Lefferts shuttle and replace one long local with another.

[Lance]

It's almost like he lives to resurrect these dead services for some strange reason.

[Wallyhorse]

That doesn't placate any Lefferts riders who would be upset over the loss of express service. All it does is eliminate the overnight Lefferts shuttle and replace one long local with another.

There would still be a limited number of peak-direction trains to/from Lefferts in my plan in addition to the being full-time (except late nights when the would run there).  Anyone who wants the in this scenario can others make a same-platform transfer anywhere between Rockaway Boulevard and Euclid Avenue.  

[NewFlyer 230]

There would still be a limited number of peak-direction trains to/from Lefferts in my plan in addition to the being full-time (except late nights when the would run there). Anyone who wants the in this scenario can others make a same-platform transfer anywhere between Rockaway Boulevard and Euclid Avenue.

I would definitely keep the out of Brooklyn. The is already local at night in Queens and from past experiences the longer a route gets the more chances there are for the route to get delayed. Plus if there was demand for more service I would make the run late nights. I don't think there is much demand for it, right now so I would leave things the way they are.

However I am personally for the idea of the to Lefferts and the to the Rockaways because of the idea of allowing Ozone Park residents to have more frequent service more specifically in the evenings and weekends. Right now sometimes you could wait up to 30 minutes for a train. It's not the scheduled time for it to show up, but the is long and it does get backed so waiting for that long isn't rare.

[CenSin]

I would definitely keep the out of Brooklyn. The is already local at night in Queens and from past experiences the longer a route gets the more chances there are for the route to get delayed. Plus if there was demand for more service I would make the run late nights. I don't think there is much demand for it, right now so I would leave things the way they are.

However I am personally for the idea of the to Lefferts and the to the Rockaways because of the idea of allowing Ozone Park residents to have more frequent service more specifically in the evenings and weekends. Right now sometimes you could wait up to 30 minutes for a train. It's not the scheduled time for it to show up, but the is long and it does get backed so waiting for that long isn't rare.

Also, the longer a route becomes, the more trains and crew you need to pay to run it. At night time, is the extra expense worth it? With the extension to Brooklyn/Queens, you double the length, requiring double the trains and double the crew.

 

If the is extended to Lefferts Boulevard, not much expense is added given that it’s only a handful of stations. At night, the shuttle would just be a instead of an as it is currently labeled.

[Jemorie]

the Lefferts shuttle is always labeled with a yellow S bullet, not the regular bullet