Rockaway Beach Branch

[Coney Island Av]

The only cheap solution to at least take some relief off of the  is converting Woodhaven in order to relieve the more-busy Roosevelt. 

And as for @T to Dyre Avenue's proposal, I agree with this. Anyone from Jamaica Center wanting 8 Av service can just switch at Union Tpke. So I don't really see much of an issue with this for relieving crowding. The extra 's will certainly handle passengers coming off of the RBB. 

Getting this back on topic, I believe earlier in the thread, @Wallyhorse brought up his idea of a  to the RBB. Me and others disagreed, but I think @bobtehpanda mentioned that no one will ride the RBB all the way to Manhattan from Howard Beach. It serves as-more of a crosstown than serving a transit desert. 

Edited December 31, 2017 by D to 96 St

[LGA Link N Train]

1 hour ago, D to 96 St said:

The only cheap solution to at least take some relief off of the  is converting Woodhaven in order to relieve the more-busy Roosevelt. 

And as for @T to Dyre Avenue's proposal, I agree with this. Anyone from Jamaica Center wanting 8 Av service can just switch at Union Tpke. So I don't really see much of an issue with this for relieving crowding. The extra 's will certainly handle passengers coming off of the RBB. 

Getting this back on topic, I believe earlier in the thread, @Wallyhorse brought up his idea of a  to the RBB. Me and others disagreed, but I think @bobtehpanda mentioned that no one will ride the RBB all the way to Manhattan from Howard Beach. It serves as-more of a crosstown than serving a transit desert. 

Aye, Crosstown is better than nothing.

Now while the area now has the Q52/Q53 SBS, It's still quite underserved.

As for a  using RBB, I guess it could work but right now I can only see it becoming a Queens Bypass route

Converting Woodhaven is a GREAT idea

Are we swapping the and  Queens Terminals??

[bobtehpanda]

1 hour ago, D to 96 St said:

The only cheap solution to at least take some relief off of the  is converting Woodhaven in order to relieve the more-busy Roosevelt. 

And as for @T to Dyre Avenue's proposal, I agree with this. Anyone from Jamaica Center wanting 8 Av service can just switch at Union Tpke. So I don't really see much of an issue with this for relieving crowding. The extra 's will certainly handle passengers coming off of the RBB. 

Getting this back on topic, I believe earlier in the thread, @Wallyhorse brought up his idea of a  to the RBB. Me and others disagreed, but I think @bobtehpanda mentioned that no one will ride the RBB all the way to Manhattan from Howard Beach. It serves as-more of a crosstown than serving a transit desert. 

People will ride it. Those people will just overwhelm the and more so than they are today. Which is most of why nobody supports this.

[LGA Link N Train]

http://app.enmodal.co/?id=b0ea530ff5063095# Map with RBB in it and some other expansions that I don't advocate

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Even so, given how much the subway lines are intertwined, especially the letter lines, I feel as though casting the RBB line into the dual role of QB local (not to mention 6th Ave/Broadway Brooklyn Local if it’s the  or Broadway/4th Ave Local if it’s the ), you can run the risk of an unreliable RBB service, due to the length of the line and all the switching/merging. 

[LGA Link N Train]

2 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Even so, given how much the subway lines are intertwined, especially the letter lines, I feel as though casting the RBB line into the dual role of QB local (not to mention 6th Ave/Broadway Brooklyn Local if it’s the  or Broadway/4th Ave Local if it’s the ), you can run the risk of an unreliable RBB service, due to the length of the line and all the switching/merging. 

That's true but there's also the Bypass that you can connect it to

[Coney Island Av]

Any train that diverts down the RBB will be long. 

I would say just extend the  to Howard Beach, but in the long-term, in the 22nd century, and a new era in which all of us currently on this forum DIE, add a new tunnel branching off of SAS at 50 St. This will connect and create a parallel service on the QB Bypass, (the other being the  to 179 St), and will divert down the RBB to Rockaway Park. 

This service will be called the . It will run to Hanover Sq with the  and will go to Fulton. It would then create a "loop" by intersecting itself at Aqueduct. 

So basically the route's like this-  2 Av Local, Rockaway Loop Exp, and Fulton St Local. 

@RR503: Yes, there will be a 4-track SAS.

Edited January 1, 2018 by D to 96 St

[RR503]

23 minutes ago, LGA Link N train said:

That's true but there's also the Bypass that you can connect it to

Thereby defeating the whole purpose of the bypass? No. Let the RBB go. You have to understand that NYC Subway expansion is an either or proposition, not a both and. Choices have to be made, and unless compared with a subway to City Island or something, the RBB will lose out. 

D to 96: you posted just before me so can’t quote you.

 Where is the SAS capacity for both a  and a ? That’s removing 30tph from SAS — ie SAS’s entire capacity. Unless there’s a 4 track SAS plan hiding in there, this is impossible. No space for . Building a new line into Queens is nice and all, but sending it’s capacity down a line whose carchement is majority parkland is just bad planning. 

Edited January 1, 2018 by RR503

[LGA Link N Train]

12 minutes ago, RR503 said:

Thereby defeating the whole purpose of the bypass? No. Let the RBB go. You have to understand that NYC Subway expansion is an either or proposition, not a both and. Choices have to be made, and unless compared with a subway to City Island or something, the RBB will lose out. 

Ah I see here, but if you do that than not much would Change. You could extend the to Jamaica and see if it's gonna be useful. Just like what the did with the in 1992 or 3??? Even though that didn't work out with the who knows what could happen with the

Edited January 1, 2018 by LGA Link N train

[T to Dyre Avenue]

15 minutes ago, LGA Link N train said:

That's true but there's also the Bypass that you can connect it to

I agree. That’s why I think doing a V train via the 63rd St tunnel and 2nd Ave would be the best option for subway service on the RBB. But for that, we’d have to have at least part of SAS Phase 3 opened.

Both the  and  are long local services with a lot of merging. The  has more merging, while the  is a longer route, so it’s one of those “pick your poison” deals.

[P3F]

24 minutes ago, RR503 said:

Thereby defeating the whole purpose of the bypass? No. Let the RBB go. You have to understand that NYC Subway expansion is an either or proposition, not a both and. Choices have to be made, and unless compared with a subway to City Island or something, the RBB will lose out. 

If the RBB runs 5 TPH, that's still 25 TPH left that can be run via the bypass.

If the bypass has CBTC, then there's 30 TPH available.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

21 minutes ago, RR503 said:

Thereby defeating the whole purpose of the bypass? No. Let the RBB go. You have to understand that NYC Subway expansion is an either or proposition, not a both and. Choices have to be made, and unless compared with a subway to City Island or something, the RBB will lose out. 

True. If you have an RBB service on the bypass, it’ll get very limited ridership unless there are additional stations on the bypass. These would likely need to be parallel to existing QB local stops like 63rd Drive, Woodhaven Blvd and Grand Ave. Also stops at Woodside for a connection to the  and Queens Plaza for the  . It would still be faster than either the  or , but probably wouldn’t do quite as much to relieve overcrowding on the  versus a full bypass service all the way to Jamaica.

[Coney Island Av]

40 minutes ago, LGA Link N train said:

Ah I see here, but if you do that than not much would Change. You could extend the to Jamaica and see if it's gonna be useful. Just like what the did with the in 1992 or 3??? Even though that didn't work out with the who knows what could happen with the

Do not extend the  to 179 St and  to Jamaica Center. Riders will bail the slow-local  and  at Parsons Blvd, Union Tpke, and 71 Av just like 1988-1993. 

[bobtehpanda]

1 hour ago, LGA Link N train said:

That's true but there's also the Bypass that you can connect it to

The Bypass is more useful for going to Jamaica, full stop.

[bobtehpanda]

41 minutes ago, P3F said:

If the RBB runs 5 TPH, that's still 25 TPH left that can be run via the bypass.

If the bypass has CBTC, then there's 30 TPH available.

Running services like that is just going to result in weird intervals and terrible bunching. Not to mention, there's actually only 15TPH around given that the Bypass leads to 63 St.

Edited January 1, 2018 by bobtehpanda

[LGA Link N Train]

Everything aside for a moment 

 

HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE 

[BreeddekalbL]

I was told study will be released some time this month 2018

[Coney Island Av]

4 minutes ago, BreeddekalbL said:

I was told study will be released some time this month 2018

If "the maniac" aka Koslowitz says that the Queensway will commence construction, and the "hoes" win, I will be so furious. 

The Queensway is barren and there's ABSOLUTELY NOTHING around it! 

But seriously, the study HAS TO INCLUDE branching off of QBL. That way, we will be a step closer to victory! 

 

Edited January 1, 2018 by D to 96 St

[RR503]

38 minutes ago, D to 96 St said:

If "the maniac" aka Koslowitz says that the Queensway will commence construction, and the "hoes" win, I will be so furious. 

The Queensway is barren and there's ABSOLUTELY NOTHING around it! 

But seriously, the study HAS TO INCLUDE branching off of QBL. That way, we will be a step closer to victory! 

 

....and a step closer to QBL overcrowding.

I honestly hope that if this ever goes through (god forbid — what a waste of $$) they do LIRR. At least that’ll strengthen the call for fare uniformity within city limits, and maybe help planners see the value of regional rail in NYC. 

Edited January 2, 2018 by RR503

[LGA Link N Train]

2 hours ago, RR503 said:

....and a step closer to QBL overcrowding.

As a QBL rider myself, I'd say that we'll have a greater warrant to build the Queens bypass. 

I honestly hope that if this ever goes through (god forbid — what a waste of $$) they do LIRR.

If they do LIRR, then where and How will it Terminate?

At least that’ll strengthen the call for fare uniformity within city limits, and maybe help planners see the value of regional rail in NYC. 

Like RPA and RethinkNYC?

Replies are in bold 

Edited January 2, 2018 by LGA Link N train

[LGA Link N Train]

3 hours ago, D to 96 St said:

If "the maniac" aka Koslowitz says that the Queensway will commence construction, and the "hoes" win, I will be so furious. 

I personally don't think that Queensway would become a reality at all

The Queensway is barren and there's ABSOLUTELY NOTHING around it! 

it's a park that runs into another park so go figure

But seriously, the study HAS TO INCLUDE branching off of QBL. That way, we will be a step closer to victory! 

I still think that QBL-RBB connection is the most feasible in my opinion. and that it warrants a greater need for the bypass

Replies are in Bold

[BreeddekalbL]

and you all saw my quote in the last page that the great gavone (deblasio) says that if the study says it should be a transit asset then he will lean that way 

[T to Dyre Avenue]

1 hour ago, BreeddekalbL said:

and you all saw my quote in the last page that the great gavone (deblasio) says that if the study says it should be a transit asset then he will lean that way 

I sure hope he does. And, pleeeease, not towards converting the branch into Bus Rapid Transit!

On ‎12‎/‎31‎/‎2017 at 9:05 PM, RR503 said:

Thereby defeating the whole purpose of the bypass? No. Let the RBB go. You have to understand that NYC Subway expansion is an either or proposition, not a both and. Choices have to be made, and unless compared with a subway to City Island or something, the RBB will lose out. 

D to 96: you posted just before me so can’t quote you.

 Where is the SAS capacity for both a  and a ? That’s removing 30tph from SAS — ie SAS’s entire capacity. Unless there’s a 4 track SAS plan hiding in there, this is impossible. No space for . Building a new line into Queens is nice and all, but sending it’s capacity down a line whose carchement is majority parkland is just bad planning. 

Definitely no need for both a ( V ) and an ( H ). One of them is sufficient. I’d be open to the idea of a V train via the 63rd St tunnel and SAS with up to six additional stops along the LIRR Main Line (including Woodside-61st St), to take some pressure off some of the busier QB local stops that funnel more passengers onto the overcrowded  and  trains, not to mention the  local riders who transfer at 74th St.

Edited January 2, 2018 by T to Dyre Avenue

[LGA Link N Train]

Well, I was evaluating this discussion and apparently we're ALL trying to make a point.

By the way, any news yet on RBB cause I haven't heard anything in a while

Edited January 7, 2018 by LGA Link N train

[quadcorder]

4 hours ago, LGA Link N train said:

Well, I was evaluating this discussion and apparently we're ALL trying to make a point.

By the way, any news yet on RBB cause I haven't heard anything in a while

as you've been told in numerous threads, if there was news someone would have posted it.