Rockaway Beach Branch

[Coney Island Av]

@LGA Link N train Let the subway handle the city and let Metro-North handle the state. 

Metro-North is meant for the state/countryside because of the fares, frequency, and single-tracked stations. You would never see anything like this in the NYC subway. The suburbs are less dense than the city, and the NYC subway is only meant to serve areas with higher density. 

Edited April 7, 2018 by Coney Island Av

[LGA Link N Train]

1 minute ago, Coney Island Av said:

@LGA Link N train Let the subway handle the city and let Metro-North handle the state. 

Metro-North is meant for the state/countryside because of the fares, frequency, and single-tracked stations. You would never see anything like this in the NYC subway. The suburbs are less dense than the city, and the NYC subway is only meant serve areas with higher density. 

I wouldn't speak too soon. There are some railroads that run MORE frequent trains than us. And if you let the Long Island Railroad and Metro North serve both city and countryside, then you could possibly stop crowding the Major stations. 

(geez my words feel inconsistent)

[officiallyliam]

15 minutes ago, Coney Island Av said:

Let the subway handle the city and let Metro-North handle the state. 

Metro-North is meant for the state/countryside because of the fares, frequency, and single-tracked stations. You would never see anything like this in the NYC subway. The suburbs are less dense than the city, and the NYC subway is only meant to serve areas with higher density. 

Spare me with that. Then why are there outer-city stops on the railroad in the first place? The fares and the frequency, at least within the city, can be changed. None of the lines within the city are single-tracked, nor are most of the commuter lines in the region to begin with. All that needs to happen is that railroad trains that already pass though the city start making stops in the city.

The only reason this is being proposed in the first place is because the subway is struggling to "handle the city" - meanwhile, there are trains with capacity to spare passing through the city without stopping. The only reason we don't use this capacity is because suburbanites want to be kept separate from city-dwellers.

[Wallyhorse]

3 hours ago, officiallyliam said:

Fares within the city would have to be rationalized. This means the end of commuter rail service being treated as a "premium"; rather, it should be treated as an equivalent public service to subway and bus services. While a zonal fare system could continue outside of the city, free transfers would need to be available to the subway and to bus services within NYC, and should also be available to NICE buses in Nassau. Within the city (and gradually expanding outside), LIRR stations should have faregates installed as its a much more efficient way to deal with the collection of a large number of fares.

In Philadelphia, SEPTA is actually doing this at the main Regional Rail stations where you will have to go through once the SEPTA Key is fully implemented on the Regional Rail as well as validate at all stations before boarding trains and again once getting off of such I believe.  The LIRR (and conceivably Metro-North) could do something similar to that.

[RR503]

15 hours ago, LGA Link N train said:

While useful, the Queens Bypass should be a proposal left alone for a better solution. (To rephrase that, I'm saying that we should look into something that'd be a better alternative to the Queens Bypass) Of course, there's no way in hell that it'd be RBB. I'd just increase LIRR service since East Side Access is being built. (of course you'd have to deal with Penn Station

I think LIRR service could help with Queens capacity issues, but unless you drastically increase frequency even after ESA (which would require rebuilding junctions and deinterlining the LIRR), you'd never be able to match the capacity provided by a bypass. Subway and commuter rail exist in two wholly different worlds. One expects there to be standees. The other wants to give everyone a cushy seat. It's just different.

I'm not saying we shouldn't do lower fares; I just think that they aren't a replacement for more subway capacity. 

[W4ST]

18 hours ago, LGA Link N train said:

While useful, the Queens Bypass should be a proposal left alone for a better solution. (To rephrase that, I'm saying that we should look into something that'd be a better alternative to the Queens Bypass) Of course, there's no way in hell that it'd be RBB. I'd just increase LIRR service since East Side Access is being built. (of course you'd have to deal with Penn Station

I think the bypass + subway would be preferable. I agree with some discussion earlier that the bypass subway should recapture the Port Washington Branch, but I think it could serve other parts of Queens as well through branching. One branch could go to Port Washington (with few trains going past Great Neck) and one branch could go to Pomonok / Fresh Meadows. You could increase LIRR service for more capacity but the subway would have way more capacity (possibly up to 15 tph to Pomonok and 15 tph to Great Neck / Port Washington).

[BreeddekalbL]

Delayed Again!

https://www.rockawave.com/articles/queensrail-gets-switched-to-local-track/

[Deucey]

25 minutes ago, BreeddekalbL said:

Delayed Again!

https://www.rockawave.com/articles/queensrail-gets-switched-to-local-track/

No doubt to ensure that the "correct" answer is received when the report is issued...

[BreeddekalbL]

22 hours ago, Deucey said:

No doubt to ensure that the "correct" answer is received when the report is issued...

Hopefully you are right on that 

[Deucey]

6 minutes ago, BreeddekalbL said:

Hopefully you are right on that 

Remember, there's a difference between the "correct" answer and the "right" answer.

Like how the EU made Ireland vote repeatedly on the Constitution-turned-treaty until it was approved? That approval was the "correct" answer; the right answer was Ireland voting "No" because the Irish didn't want it.

That's what I mean here.

[BreeddekalbL]

1 hour ago, Deucey said:

Remember, there's a difference between the "correct" answer and the "right" answer.

Like how the EU made Ireland vote repeatedly on the Constitution-turned-treaty until it was approved? That approval was the "correct" answer; the right answer was Ireland voting "No" because the Irish didn't want it.

That's what I mean here.

So i take you mean they will say oh we recommend restoration but make it so astronomical like crowley's lrt study that it will make it infeasible

[Deucey]

43 minutes ago, BreeddekalbL said:

So i take you mean they will say oh we recommend restoration but make it so astronomical like crowley's lrt study that it will make it infeasible

[BreeddekalbL]

🤔

Sounds Intriguing

https://www.rockawave.com/articles/queens-rail-and-way-task-force-begins-work/

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Yes I saw this on my Facebook news feed. Good to see them cooperating on both parkland and rail, but it probably won’t answer the questions about ridership in an area of Queens that isn’t exactly short on rail transit options. We can debate endlessly (as we already have) on whether or not said rail transit options come up short or not, depending on where riders are headed. 

[Coney Island Av]

Well, despite the intense debating over RBB, it's still way better than a typical act of MTA's sheer blindness. 

Even if it is built, the notoriously delayed  seems to be the one to get a proposed extension instead of the . The  could return to Forest Hills either way. 

However, you guys bring up good points objecting to this line's reactivation. Although there are many projects out there wayyy more important than this, it's just good to see that MTA is considering other projects besides SAS, ESA, and the NYCT Bus reconfiguration. 

[Wallyhorse]

14 hours ago, Coney Island Av said:

Well, despite the intense debating over RBB, it's still way better than a typical act of MTA's sheer blindness. 

Even if it is built, the notoriously delayed  seems to be the one to get a proposed extension instead of the . The  could return to Forest Hills either way. 

However, you guys bring up good points objecting to this line's reactivation. Although there are many projects out there wayyy more important than this, it's just good to see that MTA is considering other projects besides SAS, ESA, and the NYCT Bus reconfiguration. 

And I would do it with the  becoming the RBB line 24/7 (starting at 34th Street late nights) and the  subsequently shifted back to Astoria (done where  trains going to Coney Island yard, where such would be shifted to, run via Sea Beach or West End in Service).  That shortens the route considerably. 

[T to Dyre Avenue]

On 5/16/2018 at 5:04 PM, Coney Island Av said:

Well, despite the intense debating over RBB, it's still way better than a typical act of MTA's sheer blindness. 

Even if it is built, the notoriously delayed  seems to be the one to get a proposed extension instead of the . The  could return to Forest Hills either way. 

However, you guys bring up good points objecting to this line's reactivation. Although there are many projects out there wayyy more important than this, it's just good to see that MTA is considering other projects besides SAS, ESA, and the NYCT Bus reconfiguration. 

Well we don’t know that for sure. It’s “Capt Subways’ “ proposal to extend the . That’s his map from a guest post on the Cap’n Transit blog. And it would still be a mighty tight squeeze for the ,  and  between Queens Plaza and 63rd Drive, even if the  were to break off after 63rd. I suppose the  might be preferable over the , because the  runs seven days a week in Manhattan and on Queens Blvd and has fewer merges. The  would have even fewer merges if 38th Street Yard in Sunset Park, Brooklyn, is expanded to store/stage revenue service trains and that becomes the ’s primary yard.

Thing is, you’d have to have 24/7 train service on RBB and there currently isn’t a service that can serve it. You can have a line serving RBB that doesn’t run 24/7 on its entire route (please, nobody say  or !). But then you’d have to have a place to short turn trains operating over the RBB segment of the line. Either you run the  and  local overnight all the way through Queens and terminate the  or  at Roosevelt, requiring a switch from the southbound local to the southbound express track, then a reverse move onto the northbound express to head back. Or spend huge bucks to rebuild Woodhaven Blvd into an express station and install additional switches that would allow trains to/from RBB to turn back there. But that’ll cost a lot and cause giant headaches for Queens IND riders everywhere, for a service that may get relatively limited ridership. 

10 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

And I would do it with the  becoming the RBB line 24/7 (starting at 34th Street late nights) and the  subsequently shifted back to Astoria (done where  trains going to Coney Island yard, where such would be shifted to, run via Sea Beach or West End in Service).  That shortens the route considerably. 

If 38th St Yard in Sunset Park is expanded to allow revenue service trains to be stored and staged there, then I can agree. Because then the issue of the  not having a storage yard close by would finally go away. As would the need to have  trains cross from express to local to serve Astoria. It would become much easier to keep Broadway Expresses and Locals on separate tracks all the way through Manhattan. Then you can have the  run between Bay Ridge and Astoria and the  between Whitehall and Howard Beach via the RBB. 

Expanding 38th to store revenue trains was part of the most recent Second Avenue Subway study. Given how crowded the existing B Division yards currently are, why not do it, even without a full SAS? For more heavy maintenance work,  trains can deadhead to the Coney Island Shops, as trains from many other lines already do. But expanding 38th is key. It won’t work any other way. Rerouting the  to West End, Sea Beach or Brighton is out of the question.

Edited May 17, 2018 by T to Dyre Avenue

[BreeddekalbL]

They should Rebuild woodhaven to give another express stop  cause are expresses from jackson heights to ctl crush loaded?

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Rebuilding Woodhaven into an express stop would be a major improvement on its own. Between relieving the narrow platforms at Roosevelt and cutting out one transfer for the many buses that connect to the subway at Woodhaven (thus further relieving Roosevelt), many bus riders from South Queens would have an improved commute.

[officiallyliam]

29 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Rebuilding Woodhaven into an express stop would be a major improvement on its own. Between relieving the narrow platforms at Roosevelt and cutting out one transfer for the many buses that connect to the subway at Woodhaven (thus further relieving Roosevelt), many bus riders from South Queens would have an improved commute.

I've gone back and forth on whether this is a good idea. Yes, Roosevelt has narrow platforms which don't lend themselves to the volume of passengers trying to use them, but making Woodhaven into an express stop would make even worse the uneven loading on QB local and express trains. Right now, the expresses are more popular, and are already crowded leaving Jamaica/Kew Gardens/Forest Hills; if Woodhaven was express too, the vast majority of people there would try to pile on to the there as well, leaving wasted capacity on the and . I know a lot of local riders switch to express trains anyway, but there surely are some who just prefer the one-seat ride on a local and are willing to spend the extra few minutes on it. Having Woodhaven as a local stop acts as a decent filter of passengers: you can't pick both the busier station and the busiest train.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

3 hours ago, officiallyliam said:

I've gone back and forth on whether this is a good idea. Yes, Roosevelt has narrow platforms which don't lend themselves to the volume of passengers trying to use them, but making Woodhaven into an express stop would make even worse the uneven loading on QB local and express trains. Right now, the expresses are more popular, and are already crowded leaving Jamaica/Kew Gardens/Forest Hills; if Woodhaven was express too, the vast majority of people there would try to pile on to the there as well, leaving wasted capacity on the and . I know a lot of local riders switch to express trains anyway, but there surely are some who just prefer the one-seat ride on a local and are willing to spend the extra few minutes on it. Having Woodhaven as a local stop acts as a decent filter of passengers: you can't pick both the busier station and the busiest train.

As a former QBL rider from 2012-15 when I lived in Forest Hills, I can definitely say the folks who preferred the one-seat ride with the few extra minutes on the local were clearly in the minority (including me). Locals virtually emptied out at Roosevelt with geese flocking across the platform to cram onto the . In fact  locals would be packed upon leaving 63rd Drive, so if those folks had an express to transfer to at the next stop, the locals would empty out at Woodhaven, then pick up another heavy load at Grand Ave, then those folks would transfer at Roosevelt. You’d have two smaller crowds of people transferring at Woodhaven and Roosevelt instead of one giant crowd transferring (including transferees from the )at Roosevelt now.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

10 hours ago, BreeddekalbL said:

They should Rebuild woodhaven to give another express stop  cause are expresses from jackson heights to ctl crush loaded?

The real issue is that local service is not being provided adequately. It's absolutely atrocious when only the  runs local. Trains go missing, sometimes even consecutively. Then you have a whole bunch of  and  trains dumping people off at Roosevelt. I almost always take the Q53 when I'm going to Woodhaven Boulevard, instead of the . 

Edited May 19, 2018 by BM5 via Woodhaven

[R68OnBroadway]

Would making 59th and express stop and 72nd local make more sense?

[T to Dyre Avenue]

That’s nowhere near Queens Boulevard. How would that help address overcrowding on QBL?

And it probably would make the crowding issue on the  worse than it already is because the  would get even more crowded that it already is with the  and  not stopping at 72nd. Not to mention that the  platforms at 59th St are part of the original IRT subway and were not designed with provisions for conversion to an express station like Woodhaven Blvd was.

Edited May 19, 2018 by T to Dyre Avenue

[Coney Island Av]

12 hours ago, R68OnBroadway said:

Would making 59th and express stop and 72nd local make more sense?

As @T to Dyre Avenue said, no. It's the same reason why 74th-Broadway on the  and Bleecker St on the  is local.