Jump to content

Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
LGA Link N train

Rockaway Beach Branch

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Lawrence St said:

What do you mean why? That's how it's been for the past two decades or so! I hope you realize most of the Astoria riders before the return of the (W) would always board the (Q) because it was the sole Broadway Express.

Just because it used to happen doesn't mean it still should. People should also not try to pack onto crammed expresses, and its their fault if they choose perceived time savings over real ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Lawrence St said:

Didn't know Bay Ridge was Astoria...

Since when did I say that? Both lines are relatively short and if anything Bay Ridge is better for express service than local as 4th is actually a true express line the whole way, unlike Broadway which is really only a true express south of 34th. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, R68OnBroadway said:

Just because it used to happen doesn't mean it still should. People should also not try to pack onto crammed expresses, and its their fault if they choose perceived time savings over real ones.

That's because that's how the people WANT it. If you take out their 1 seat ride Astoria will go into a riot. You've seen what happened like with the (A) to Lefferts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

That's because that's how the people WANT it. If you take out their 1 seat ride Astoria will go into a riot. You've seen what happened like with the (A) to Lefferts.

Well they can deal with it. You don't need to surrender to Astoria riders. Also, having only Broadway local service isn't an issue given that most are headed for Midtown. Fulton also has a better argument considering Fulton has longer distances between express stops.

(BTW, I forgot that the (N) stops at 49th, so most people have no problems in getting to work. For weekends if it so troubles them they can transfer at 57th.)

Edited by R68OnBroadway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly, having two locals (the (R)(W)) serving Astoria won't be that big of a deal. Most proposals with having the (N) go to SAS leave Astoria with local-only service. 

And having one express/one local will DEFEAT THE PURPOSE of even doing this in the first place, as it'll still keep the merge between 34 St and 42 St. Besides, you'd just be running the exact same pattern like today if you did such. Segregating the express/locals will allow for no-stress commutes to Manhattan. 

Express service won't really be a priority for Astoria given that the 60 St will face less congestion, and commutes to Manhattan will be a lot faster than before. When the (Q) ran there, the 60 St Tubes were facing a lot of congestion given the (N)(Q)(R) were cramming into the tube. Also, unlike present-day Astoria service, all trains will go to both Midtown and the Financial District, instead of having to wait for the (W) if you worked below Midtown. The (C) to Lefferts on the other hand necessitates a merge S/B at Grant and N/B at Rockaway Blvd, whereas only the (R)(W) to Astoria has none. 

And FYI, the (N) stops at 49 St, so your point about express service is somewhat moot. The (N)(W) will still take the same time to get to Midtown regardless of whether it's express or local. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know what is with you people modifying service patterns that don't need to be touched... 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

I don't know what is with you people modifying service patterns that don't need to be touched... 

The Broadway merge is a nightmare, and should be deinterlined. It slows everything down and hinders capacity, as well as Rogers. 

  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

I don't know what is with you people modifying service patterns that don't need to be touched... 

In the most basic sense, you're right. None of this needs to be touched; the (N) and (R)(W) merge every day at Herald Square and we get on just fine. That doesn't mean, however, that it's the optimal way to run the system, or that it needs to be in place forever. Here's the reality: that merge slows things down along the upper portion of the Broadway line, and if we ever want to increase service, we're quickly going to run in to the cap in potential that that junction places on us. Rerouting service so that the subway routes follow the paths of the tracks, without merging - so all Queens trains go local, and all 63rd Street/2nd Avenue trains go express - allows more service to be added in future, as scheduling will no longer have to account for the delay often accrued by trains crossing tracks in front of one another, nor will we need to account for the capacity crunch that occurs in the 60th Street tunnel as a result of that merge. 

If you're like the majority of passengers, and are either leaving the subway or changing trains at 42nd or 34th Streets - or even 14th - taking an (R) from Astoria to Manhattan makes very little difference compared to the (N) - especially when you account for the fact that (N) running times are slower than they could be, since it might get held up by an (R) at 11th Street, or a (Q) at 42nd. And when you consider the fact that more frequent and reliable service will run to Astoria if the trains don't have to merge, the net travel time could quite possibly be faster for many people. It also means that the very-popular Second Avenue line, which is often underserved with just the (Q), will be helped out by getting twice the service, which will also have fewer merging-related delays. 

It was brought up in the recent Fast Forward plan that Transit will examine the idea of "reduce reliance on key interlockings," or words to that effect. Hopefully, this means balancing out service patterns in instances like this. Other than the fact that people will lose a coveted "express" label, reducing the amount of these merges is something that should be done if we are to increase capacity to serve future ridership.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

So you would only have one service on Astoria? And what’s yard would the (R) have access to huh?

Was noted in another post.  The 38th Street Yard in Sunset Park would likely be used for the (R), which would allow the (R) to become the sole line between 95th and Astoria like it used to, with (R) trains going to the Yard either going to 36th/4th or 9th Avenue and terminate there.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
43 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

I don't know what is with you people modifying service patterns that don't need to be touched... 

I work for the MTA, and have spent the better part of the past year working with the Broadway/Astoria situation, so allow me to chime in. 

That Broadway merge at 34 that you claim is not worth touching is actually among the most pernicious in the system. It’s a thirteen mile-per-hour crossover in regular service in the middle of Midtown, making it an all to frequent source of delays, bunching and capacity loss on the (N)(R) and (W) lines. Its sheer slowness actually limits (N) tph more than Dekalb — you can’t expect more than 8 tph to use it without opening a Pandora’s box of delays and capacity restrictions. Beyond its direct capacity impacts, that merge creates a capacity shadow on Broadway. Because the (N) takes up space on both the local and express tracks, its impact is doubled and the maximum corridor throughput is thus reduced. If we ever want to run a semblance of normalized service on that corridor, it is imperative that we eliminate that shadow effect and allow all tracks to reach full service. So while we — trigger warning — may have to change service patterns, I’d posit that it’s damn well worth it. 

In terms of what I’d do, there are a couple options. In the most immediate time frame, you could send the (N) to 96 and beef up the (W) in its place, which eliminates 34 but keeps another shit set of merges at the ends of the 11th St cut. Whether we want to eliminate those latter merges is up for debate, but doing so would require some editing of the terminal interlocking at Astoria (crossovers south of Astoria Boulevard being my favorite option for accomplishing this, though they may require structural mods) as the current configuration can’t handle all Broadway local service. The yard issue with Bway/Bay Ridge service is what it is, but given that we already relay plenty of (R)s north of 36, and that the 11th St cut would be free for train staging, I don’t see that issue and insurmountable either. 

Back to 11th St though. Removing the (R) from that connector — and by extension, from QB — would trigger a cascade of deinterlining, but in light of the shadow cap both on Broadway and 8th Ave, along with the growth of Astoria and the coming shift of Midtown to the west, I really don’t see such a reorganization of Queens service as being all that negative. What we currently have is convenient by design, but I don’t think that, in a city where we seem unable to build, we can be so picky about convenience. Between the hole on 8th Ave exp and on Broadway, there’s an entire two-track trunk line (1/6 of B Div Manhattan trunk cap) of unused throughput. Maybe time to harness that. 

Edited by RR503
  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

What do you mean why? That's how it's been for the past two decades or so! I hope you realize most of the Astoria riders before the return of the (W) would always board the (Q) because it was the sole Broadway Express.

As someone who frequently changed at Queensboro Plaza from the (7) to the (N)(Q) during 2015-16, I can say with certainty that was not the case. (Q) trains were not significantly more crowded than (N) trains just because the (Q) was the sole Broadway Express at that time. Most riders exited the trains at 49th, 42nd or 34th - none of which could be reached faster on the (Q) vs the (N). And if you go back and review the history of Astoria line service patterns over the past two decades, you’ll notice it always had 24/7 local service during that time (the (N) is not express in Manhattan on weekends or overnight and was full time local during 1998-2004 and 2010-16) with limited Broadway express service (be it the 2001-04 (W), the 2010-16 (Q) or the 2004-10 and current (N)). In fact, 20 years ago - 1998 - Astoria had nothing but 24/7 (N) local service.

1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

That's because that's how the people WANT it. If you take out their 1 seat ride Astoria will go into a riot. You've seen what happened like with the (A) to Lefferts.

No it’s not! In 2001, when Transit needed to shut down the 6th Avenue Manhattan Bridge tracks full time for the second time, they needed a place to turn weekday (W) service (express at the time because it had replaced the (B)). They couldn’t use 57th St, because that station needed to turn both the (Q) (which replaced the (D)) and the <Q> (which replaced the orange Q) during the rush and middays. The Astoria part of the (N) had (and still has) higher ridership than Sea Beach part, so it was decided to run a less-frequent (N) (which was local full time then) along with the (W). I rode the (N)(W) at that time too and there was very little difference in the ridership of one vs the other (after they stopped running the (W) as a peak direction express in Queens because it ran damn near-empty trains when they did). 

No, I didn’t see what happened with Lefferts (A) line riders? What exactly did happen there?

1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

I don't know what is with you people modifying service patterns that don't need to be touched... 

More frequent and reliable service? Fewer delays due to signal and switch problems?

Edited by T to Dyre Avenue
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

That's because that's how the people WANT it. If you take out their 1 seat ride Astoria will go into a riot. You've seen what happened like with the (A) to Lefferts.

Well Lefferts Blvd is about twice as far from Midtown Manhattan, and even farther from Downtown, than Ditmars Blvd is.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

I don't know what is with you people modifying service patterns that don't need to be touched... 

The reason why we're modifying these service patterns is precisely because as mentioned for the hundredth thousandth time before- ad nauseam delays. From my point of view, I see you as an average NY citizen that uses the subway daily, and doesn't really care for what's going on behind the scenes. Most of us that examine these bottlenecks and find solutions to eliminate them are more experienced from what's going on from an operational standpoint and commute patterns. @RR503's summary of the 34 St (N)(R)(W) merge was very thorough and was a very accurate explanation about why we're even trying to untangle this to begin with. @T to Dyre Avenue even stated that from his experience, the (Q) wasn't even significantly more crowded. Given their experience, I trust them. Before you object, I don't see your point as moot. Long story short, I just feel that you should just take what @RR503 and a few others have been saying into consideration as to why this has to be done. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RR503 said:

I work for the MTA, and have spent the better part of the past year working with the Broadway/Astoria situation, so allow me to chime in. 

That Broadway merge at 34 that you claim is not worth touching is actually among the most pernicious in the system. It’s a thirteen mile-per-hour crossover in regular service in the middle of Midtown, making it an all to frequent source of delays, bunching and capacity loss on the (N)(R) and (W) lines. Its sheer slowness actually limits (N) tph more than Dekalb — you can’t expect more than 8 tph to use it without opening a Pandora’s box of delays and capacity restrictions. Beyond its direct capacity impacts, that merge creates a capacity shadow on Broadway. Because the (N) takes up space on both the local and express tracks, its impact is doubled and the maximum corridor throughput is thus reduced. If we ever want to run a semblance of normalized service on that corridor, it is imperative that we eliminate that shadow effect and allow all tracks to reach full service. So while we — trigger warning — may have to change service patterns, I’d posit that it’s damn well worth it. 

In terms of what I’d do, there are a couple options. In the most immediate time frame, you could send the (N) to 96 and beef up the (W) in its place, which eliminates 34 but keeps another shit set of merges at the ends of the 11th St cut. Whether we want to eliminate those latter merges is up for debate, but doing so would require some editing of the terminal interlocking at Astoria (crossovers south of Astoria Boulevard being my favorite option for accomplishing this, though they may require structural mods) as the current configuration can’t handle all Broadway local service. The yard issue with Bway/Bay Ridge service is what it is, but given that we already relay plenty of (R)s north of 36, and that the 11th St cut would be free for train staging, I don’t see that issue and insurmountable either. 

Back to 11th St though. Removing the (R) from that connector — and by extension, from QB — would trigger a cascade of deinterlining, but in light of the shadow cap both on Broadway and 8th Ave, along with the growth of Astoria and the coming shift of Midtown to the west, I really don’t see such a reorganization of Queens service as being all that negative. What we currently have is convenient by design, but I don’t think that, in a city where we seem unable to build, we can be so picky about convenience. Between the hole on 8th Ave exp and on Broadway, there’s an entire two-track trunk line (1/6 of B Div Manhattan trunk cap) of unused throughput. Maybe time to harness that. 

Agreed that getting rid of the 34th merge will help the (N)(Q)(R)(W) lines immensely. But if the (W) gets beefed up and the (N) sent to 2nd Ave full time, they’d have to figure out where - in addition to Whitehall - to turn rush hour (possibly also midday) (W) trains on the south end and whether or not to run both the (N) and (W) on weekends. 

I seem to recall a post about changing QBL local service that would involve making the (M) the primary QB local service and the Broadway/QB service (either (R) or (W)) the secondary service. I’m not sure if that was posted in the Subway Proposals thread, the 2nd Ave Discussion thread or here. I wonder if that’s something worth considering. Though that proposal probably wouldn’t help staging (R) or (W) trains in the 11th St Cut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Agreed that getting rid of the 34th merge will help the (N)(Q)(R)(W) lines immensely. But if the (W) gets beefed up and the (N) sent to 2nd Ave full time, they’d have to figure out where - in addition to Whitehall - to turn rush hour (possibly also midday) (W) trains on the south end and whether or not to run both the (N) and (W) on weekends. 

You could run a pretty simple service pattern here: (N) from 96th to CI via Sea Beach; (Q) from 96th to CI via Brighton; (R) from Bay Ridge to Astoria, based at 36th Street Yard. The question here is whether we want to continue running Broadway service to Queens Blvd. We could run the (W) via QBL, or remove Broadway services all together; the latter option will require a number of other BMT and IND route changes in order to harness the maximum amount of capacity, but has the benefit of sending more service to Astoria and eliminating the reverse-branch from the QBL.

44 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

I seem to recall a post about changing QBL local service that would involve making the (M) the primary QB local service and the Broadway/QB service (either (R) or (W)) the secondary service. I’m not sure if that was posted in the Subway Proposals thread, the 2nd Ave Discussion thread or here. I wonder if that’s something worth considering. Though that proposal probably wouldn’t help staging (R) or (W) trains in the 11th St Cut.

If no revenue trains need to be run through it, the 11th Street cut can be used to stage or reverse (R) or (W) trains; this is impossible so long as any train needs to use the connection in regular service. Getting the most Manhattan to Queens capacity on existing tracks requires total deinterlining of 60th Street (no Broadway to QBL trains) as well as deinterlining the junctions at Queens Plaza and 36th Street.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Agreed that getting rid of the 34th merge will help the (N)(Q)(R)(W) lines immensely. But if the (W) gets beefed up and the (N) sent to 2nd Ave full time, they’d have to figure out where - in addition to Whitehall - to turn rush hour (possibly also midday) (W) trains on the south end and whether or not to run both the (N) and (W) on weekends. 

I seem to recall a post about changing QBL local service that would involve making the (M) the primary QB local service and the Broadway/QB service (either (R) or (W)) the secondary service. I’m not sure if that was posted in the Subway Proposals thread, the 2nd Ave Discussion thread or here. I wonder if that’s something worth considering. Though that proposal probably wouldn’t help staging (R) or (W) trains in the 11th St Cut.

You could open City Hall lower and turn some trains there. 

Also, what/where is the 11th St cut? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said:

Also, what/where is the 11th St cut?

60th Street Tunnel = 11th Street Cut on the Queens side

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, officiallyliam said:

You could run a pretty simple service pattern here: (N) from 96th to CI via Sea Beach; (Q) from 96th to CI via Brighton; (R) from Bay Ridge to Astoria, based at 36th Street Yard. The question here is whether we want to continue running Broadway service to Queens Blvd. We could run the (W) via QBL, or remove Broadway services all together; the latter option will require a number of other BMT and IND route changes in order to harness the maximum amount of capacity, but has the benefit of sending more service to Astoria and eliminating the reverse-branch from the QBL.

If no revenue trains need to be run through it, the 11th Street cut can be used to stage or reverse (R) or (W) trains; this is impossible so long as any train needs to use the connection in regular service. Getting the most Manhattan to Queens capacity on existing tracks requires total deinterlining of 60th Street (no Broadway to QBL trains) as well as deinterlining the junctions at Queens Plaza and 36th Street.

I guess the (W) is the (W)ildcard here. We can keep it and run it to/from QBL on weekdays-only service if the (R) is becomes based out of 36th St Yard, while expanding the (M) into a seven-day service between Essex and Forest Hills. It may not give as much capacity as a total de-interlining of the 60th St Tunnel, but with the (N) no longer merging at 34th, you can increase Broadway Local and Express service because they’d be completely separated from 57th to DeKalb. 

On the other hand, a weekdays-only (W) wouldn’t be feasible as an RBB service (to get this back on topic). Any line running there should run there seven days a week to keep the service pattern simple. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I go to sleep and I already have 20 notifications from this thread lol.

I'm not saying we need to keep the merge at Herald Square, I'm saying that we also need to put the riders in priority as well. Just because changing something makes it easier to squeeze in trains doesn't mean that the riders will be happy. The way how ridership levels are balanced is from the services that directly serve them. If you were to replace the (A) to Lefferts with the (C) to Lefferts, this causes more riders to transfer at either Rockaway Blvd or Euclid Av. Same thing here. If you were to have the (R) as the sole Astoria line, people on Astoria lose their one seat express ride to Coney Island via Sea Beach and instead start transferring at 57th St for the (N) or (Q). Astoria riders have had the (N) for what, two decades now? Why modify something that affects riders nowhere close to the problem? Sure the problem at Hearld Square causes problems for everyone but we need to find another way. What needs to be done is a reconfiguration of the switches at 57th St.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Or another plan if I may add:

(N) - Broadway Local via Whitehall all times, CI - Astoria.

(Q) - Broadway Express, CI - 125th St

(R) - Broadway Express via Bridge, Bay Ridge to 125th St

(W) - Broadway Local, Whitehall to Rockaway Park

 

At least this allows for easy change between the (N) and (W) at Whitehall, and gets ride of the merge at 34th St.

Edited by Lawrence St

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

I go to sleep and I already have 20 notifications from this thread lol.

I'm not saying we need to keep the merge at Herald Square, I'm saying that we also need to put the riders in priority as well. Just because changing something makes it easier to squeeze in trains doesn't mean that the riders will be happy. The way how ridership levels are balanced is from the services that directly serve them. If you were to replace the (A) to Lefferts with the (C) to Lefferts, this causes more riders to transfer at either Rockaway Blvd or Euclid Av. Same thing here. If you were to have the (R) as the sole Astoria line, people on Astoria lose their one seat express ride to Coney Island via Sea Beach and instead start transferring at 57th St for the (N) or (Q). Astoria riders have had the (N) for what, two decades now? Why modify something that affects riders nowhere close to the problem? Sure the problem at Hearld Square causes problems for everyone but we need to find another way. What needs to be done is a reconfiguration of the switches at 57th St.

Yes, it is about balance. What is empirically clear is that the current balance is wrong. Few -- if any -- people are commuting from Astoria to points along the (N) line in Brooklyn, thus preserving a one-seat ride for them at the expense of operational sanity for everyone else is wasteful and undemocratic. Why spend money on switch reconfigs and all that jazz when you can, tomorrow, deinterline a merge without causing significant rider impact -- indeed, increasing service on SAS and Broadway.

And for whatever it's worth the (A)(C) Lefferts thing is not at all comparable to Astoria. In the former scenario, the major express segment happens between the origin and the core; in the latter, the express running takes place after riders would pass through the core. Furthermore, despite your decrying (A)(C) Lefferts, I've heard (though, to be fair, not actually seen) that it has been studied internally, and would actually be a net benefit for riders -- especially if the (C) ran out there only in the off-peak. 

As for your proposed service plan (which I idiotically neglected to quote), while it'd do what you say, it'd require the (N) and (R) to switch places on the local and express tracks somewhere along 4th Avenue. It'd also overload Whitehall with 15tph from Astoria, causing conga lines the size of Donald Trump's insecurity on Bway local. This is to say nothing of the fact that, in pursuing balance, you've just killed Sea Beach riders' express ride to Manhattan. So maybe not...

Edited by RR503
  • LMAO! 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, RR503 said:

Yes, it is about balance. What is empirically clear is that the current balance is wrong. Few -- if any -- people are commuting from Astoria to points along the (N) line in Brooklyn, thus preserving a one-seat ride for them at the expense of operational sanity for everyone else is wasteful and undemocratic. Why spend money on switch reconfigs and all that jazz when you can, tomorrow, deinterline a merge without causing significant rider impact -- indeed, increasing service on SAS and Broadway.

And for whatever it's worth the (A)(C) Lefferts thing is not at all comparable to Astoria. In the former scenario, the major express segment happens between the origin and the core; in the latter, the express running takes place after riders would pass through the core. Furthermore, despite your decrying (A)(C) Lefferts, I've heard (though, to be fair, not actually seen) that it has been studied internally, and would actually be a net benefit for riders -- especially if the (C) ran out there only in the off-peak. 

As for your proposed service plan (which I idiotically neglected to quote), while it'd do what you say, it'd require the (N) and (R) to switch places on the local and express tracks somewhere along 4th Avenue. It'd also overload Whitehall with 15tph from Astoria, causing conga lines the size of Donald Trump's insecurity on Bway local. This is to say nothing of the fact that, in pursuing balance, you've just killed Sea Beach riders' express ride to Manhattan. So maybe not...

I was going to say something but that lasst trump remark had me on the floor lmao. Carry on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/1/2018 at 1:13 PM, Lawrence St said:

Or another plan if I may add:

(N) - Broadway Local via Whitehall all times, CI - Astoria.

(Q) - Broadway Express, CI - 125th St

(R) - Broadway Express via Bridge, Bay Ridge to 125th St

(W) - Broadway Local, Whitehall to Rockaway Park

 

At least this allows for easy change between the (N) and (W) at Whitehall, and gets ride of the merge at 34th St.

That could work too, but it would require reconfiguring the track setup at 59th St to have (R) trains come in on the center tracks and (N) trains on the outside tracks. Or reconfiguring the track setup to allow (R) trains to bypass DeKalb Ave without interfering with (D) and (N) service. Either option would be a very expensive undertaking. 

On 6/1/2018 at 5:38 PM, RR503 said:

Yes, it is about balance. What is empirically clear is that the current balance is wrong. Few -- if any -- people are commuting from Astoria to points along the (N) line in Brooklyn, thus preserving a one-seat ride for them at the expense of operational sanity for everyone else is wasteful and undemocratic. Why spend money on switch reconfigs and all that jazz when you can, tomorrow, deinterline a merge without causing significant rider impact -- indeed, increasing service on SAS and Broadway.

And for whatever it's worth the (A)(C) Lefferts thing is not at all comparable to Astoria. In the former scenario, the major express segment happens between the origin and the core; in the latter, the express running takes place after riders would pass through the core. Furthermore, despite your decrying (A)(C) Lefferts, I've heard (though, to be fair, not actually seen) that it has been studied internally, and would actually be a net benefit for riders -- especially if the (C) ran out there only in the off-peak. 

As for your proposed service plan (which I idiotically neglected to quote), while it'd do what you say, it'd require the (N) and (R) to switch places on the local and express tracks somewhere along 4th Avenue. It'd also overload Whitehall with 15tph from Astoria, causing conga lines the size of Donald Trump's insecurity on Bway local. This is to say nothing of the fact that, in pursuing balance, you've just killed Sea Beach riders' express ride to Manhattan. So maybe not...

Agreed, we really don’t need to completely reconfigure South Brooklyn service to de-interline Broadway, while taking away Sea Beach express service. 

As for the (A)(C) to Lefferts, I didn’t they were actually considering sending the (C) there during off peak. I assume that would (should) include weekday midday hours too, because (A) service on the two branches really drops off after AM rush is over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/1/2018 at 1:13 PM, Lawrence St said:

Or another plan if I may add:

(N) - Broadway Local via Whitehall all times, CI - Astoria.

(Q) - Broadway Express, CI - 125th St

(R) - Broadway Express via Bridge, Bay Ridge to 125th St

(W) - Broadway Local, Whitehall to Rockaway Park

 

At least this allows for easy change between the (N) and (W) at Whitehall, and gets ride of the merge at 34th St.

 

On 6/4/2018 at 11:02 PM, T to Dyre Avenue said:

That could work too, but it would require reconfiguring the track setup at 59th St to have (R) trains come in on the center tracks and (N) trains on the outside tracks. Or reconfiguring the track setup to allow (R) trains to bypass DeKalb Ave without interfering with (D) and (N) service. Either option would be a very expensive undertaking.  


The (W) local as noted I would do Whitehall-Rockaway Park.  The rest I would do like this:

(R) returning to its former route of 95th-Astoria, based out of Coney Island Yard.  Trains going to the yard run normal route to 36th Street and then run in service via the West End or Sea Beach to Coney Island (with the reverse true for trains coming from CI Yard).

(N) is full express from CI-125th Street via Sea Beach and 4th Avenue

(Q) remains as is to 125th Street via Brighton.

That would be the simplest way to do it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

 


The (W) local as noted I would do Whitehall-Rockaway Park.  The rest I would do like this:

(R) returning to its former route of 95th-Astoria, based out of Coney Island Yard.  Trains going to the yard run normal route to 36th Street and then run in service via the West End or Sea Beach to Coney Island (with the reverse true for trains coming from CI Yard).

(N) is full express from CI-125th Street via Sea Beach and 4th Avenue

(Q) remains as is to 125th Street via Brighton.

That would be the simplest way to do it.

 

YES, WE GET IT.

Saying the same thing three times won't make it come true, this isn't wish kid.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.