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.
LaGuardia Link N Tra

Rockaway Beach Branch

Recommended Posts

Most of the line no longer exists or is torn up between Forest Park and Rego Park.

I think if anything,the section north of Myrtle av can be absorbed by the subway and run under Woodhaven Bl and the abandoned section north of Metropolitan Av.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have seen a LOT of illegal squatters along the EBB. This is most noticeable on the elevated section in Queens, as a bus parking lot company has taken over most of Woodhaven Junction Station. Ozone Park is literally falling apart, Parkside no longer exists, that new building completely tore up the portion between Forest Park and the baseball field for their new parking lot, and now they're thinking of creating new buildings on the ROW. It's either now or never before the ROW is completely gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's what I see happening. And remember, the time line for any new subway route from proposal to opening is pretty long. So I always say add a few "future factors" into place when "proposing" new service patters.

I always notice how those who plan here forget this. They plan as if its opening tomorrow with our current capacity and service/ridership patterns. I'm always debating with this one guy on FB about RBB service going into the QBL "there's no space" he always says. I always repeat that by the time this line opens, CBTC will most likely be in full effect(along with substation upgrades), allowing for more trains to run, so a new 5th line can indeed be added into the QBL mix. So no, I dont see an extent I on of a current route-be it the G,M,R or even the Rock Pk shuttle. As far as the Queens Bypass, well thats IMO more of a pipe dream than the RBB. But the Queens Bypass was proposed long before current ridership and signal technology available. No need to sacrifice current LIRR mail line service when we have the ability to add to current headways once the new system is installed.

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These stupid hipsters think that their dumb QueensWay would bring peace and quiet. Don't these QueensWay hipsters realize that they still have to evict illegal squatters as well?

 

The Queensway is not a hipster idea, it's a very deliberate ploy by some homeowners in the area to prevent the rail line from ever happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Queensway is not a hipster idea, it's a very deliberate ploy by some homeowners in the area to prevent the rail line from ever happening.

Dont foeget it is owned by a developer oligarch overlord of devisionzero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And then they complain that they're privacy will be ruined if it returns to rail service, but it will still be there either way.

 

Anyway, for service patters, I think of two things: The (M) from Broadway Junction to Rockaway Park-B 116th Street, or the (S) from Rockaway Park-B 116th to Rego Park with a free transfer to 63rd Drive Rego Park.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Queensway is not a hipster idea, it's a very deliberate ploy by some homeowners in the area to prevent the rail line from ever happening.

Because many of them I suspect are fearful of people "not their kind" suddenly showing up in droves.  Many of these types likely were victims of crime in the 1970's and '80s or are children of such and still think of the subways from that time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watch it be a whole new route from rock park to Manhattan. Why? Cause down here, we need a faster route to midtown. Watch such a route go from rock pk, via QB to a terminal in Manhattan. Possibly 2nd Ave-LES. None of this shuttle crap or extending a new route. Remember, train capacity will be increased by the time this line opens

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no point to having a new route. It doesn't actually improve service. I could paint half of (M) trains with a (V) and you'd still be gettin the same damn service.

 

Extending the (M) makes the most sense, because it keeps the interlining delays to a minimum, and really the only local stop losing out is 67 Av, since the logical place the tracks would come from is east of 63 Dr Rego Park.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

There's no point to having a new route. It doesn't actually improve service. I could paint half of (M) trains with a (V) and you'd still be gettin the same damn service.

 

Extending the (M) makes the most sense, because it keeps the interlining delays to a minimum, and really the only local stop losing out is 67 Av, since the logical place the tracks would come from is east of 63 Dr Rego Park.

But There​ is a point to having a new route. 1) extending the M makes it a longer line, increasing its chances for it to become inefficient(Look at the R for example). And look at the route as it is now. Extending the M would make the route spiral thru 3 boroughs.

2) this proposed RoW as a subway is to benefit riders and commuters from just south of rego park all the way down to Rockaway. Its not really a "service improvement" but a whole new subway routing that will increase ridership since most of us here will use it to northern queens and directly to midtown. Now you can't extend the R because its long enough as it is. And you can't extend the M cause a 480' train won't cut it, especially during the summer months. It has to be a whole new route from Rockaway to Manhattan.

3) interlining: if it goes down 8th ave it will join with the E on QB. If it goes down 6th, it interlines with the M or F, and for Broadway, the R.

4) you also have to think about crews and consists. Times(and pay) on each job. What consists will be available. What yard(s) they'll come out of. And what terminals. Remember, this proposed service will have the terminal capacity for these extra trains on the Rock pk end with maybe possible short turns at JFK. Do you think Met can handle turning more trains around? For better efficiency its best to make it a whole new route where it can terminate in Rockaway/JFK and end at let's say, Second ave/Houston st, which currently isn't a terminal.

Extending a current route may seem easier, but the longer the extension, the more difficult it becomes to implement it. Especially when it comes to a route with shorter trains that can't be lengthened. Like the M.

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But There​ is a point to having a new route. 1) extending the M makes it a longer line, increasing its chances for it to become inefficient(Look at the R for example). And look at the route as it is now. Extending the M would make the route spiral thru 3 boroughs.

2) this proposed RoW as a subway is to benefit riders and commuters from just south of rego park all the way down to Rockaway. Its not really a "service improvement" but a whole new subway routing that will increase ridership since most of us here will use it to northern queens and directly to midtown. Now you can't extend the R because its long enough as it is. And you can't extend the M cause a 480' train won't cut it, especially during the summer months. It has to be a whole new route from Rockaway to Manhattan.

3) interlining: if it goes down 8th ave it will join with the E on QB. If it goes down 6th, it interlines with the M or F, and for Broadway, the R.

4) you also have to think about crews and consists. Times(and pay) on each job. What consists will be available. What yard(s) they'll come out of. And what terminals. Remember, this proposed service will have the terminal capacity for these extra trains on the Rock pk end with maybe possible short turns at JFK. Do you think Met can handle turning more trains around? For better efficiency its best to make it a whole new route where it can terminate in Rockaway/JFK and end at let's say, Second ave/Houston st, which currently isn't a terminal.

Extending a current route may seem easier, but the longer the extension, the more difficult it becomes to implement it. Especially when it comes to a route with shorter trains that can't be lengthened. Like the M.

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

 

The concern about capacity is way overblown. Even if you were to run (M) trains down the line every ten minutes, that would be many times over the capacity of all the bus routes that currently serve Woodhaven.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the first option, I agree, but I don't agree with the second option.

If it was a shuttle, both 63 Dr-Rego Park and Roosevelt Av would become impossibly overcrowded with RBB Branch residents trying to get to Manhattan. It makes more sense to send the (M) there as it offers a one-seat ride to Manhattan and frees up capacity at Forest Hills so the (G) could return there.

There is one big problem with the (M): It does not serve lower Manhattan.

 

I suspect for there to be backing, any line serving the RBB will have to serve lower Manhattan (especially to appease those, especially businesses who still think of lower Manhattan as "The Financial District" even if we know better).  The (E) would actually be in that regard a more logical candidate with the (M) replacing it as the Broadway express to Jamaica Center, however, I don't think residents in Jamaica Center would want to lose the (E). That's why I would look at making multiple changes where the (W) replaces the (R) on QB and it running Whitehall Street-Rockaway Park (late nights such would run 34th Street or Times Square-Rockaway Park).   In this format:

 

(W) as noted above.

 

(G) returns to QB and is extended to 179th Street (late nights to 71-Continental)

 

(M) becomes full-time on QB as well to 179 (late nights to 71-Continental)

 

(N) runs via Broadway Express 2nd Avenue to 96th or by then 125th Street with the (Q)

 

(R) returns to its old pre-1987 routing of 95th-Ditmars Boulevard (and becoming 24/7).  Going back to Brooklyn, (R) trains going to Coney Island Yard would run their regular route to 36th Street, then run via the (D) to Bay Parkway (making express stops only) and terminate there, with the reverse for such coming FROM Coney Island Yard (starting at Bay Parkway and running express to 36th Street before running normal route).  If needed, some (N) trains can run via 4th Avenue, Montague Tunnel and Broadway Local to Astoria (or such can be designated for instance as a "Yellow (V) ").  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is one big problem with the (M): It does not serve lower Manhattan.

 

As opposed to the (J), (Z), and (A), all of which it would intersect with? Riders on Woodhaven already have plenty of options to go to Lower Manhattan rather than trying to take some sort of scenic route through the tunnels of Midtown.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is one big problem with the (M): It does not serve lower Manhattan.

 

I suspect for there to be backing, any line serving the RBB will have to serve lower Manhattan (especially to appease those, especially businesses who still think of lower Manhattan as "The Financial District" even if we know better).  The (E) would actually be in that regard a more logical candidate with the (M) replacing it as the Broadway express to Jamaica Center, however, I don't think residents in Jamaica Center would want to lose the (E). That's why I would look at making multiple changes where the (W) replaces the (R) on QB and it running Whitehall Street-Rockaway Park (late nights such would run 34th Street or Times Square-Rockaway Park).   In this format:

 

(W) as noted above.

 

(G) returns to QB and is extended to 179th Street (late nights to 71-Continental)

 

(M) becomes full-time on QB as well to 179 (late nights to 71-Continental)

 

(N) runs via Broadway Express 2nd Avenue to 96th or by then 125th Street with the (Q)

 

(R) returns to its old pre-1987 routing of 95th-Ditmars Boulevard (and becoming 24/7).  Going back to Brooklyn, (R) trains going to Coney Island Yard would run their regular route to 36th Street, then run via the (D) to Bay Parkway (making express stops only) and terminate there, with the reverse for such coming FROM Coney Island Yard (starting at Bay Parkway and running express to 36th Street before running normal route).  If needed, some (N) trains can run via 4th Avenue, Montague Tunnel and Broadway Local to Astoria (or such can be designated for instance as a "Yellow (V) ").  

Not every train has to go to lower Manhattan.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many times must we tell you the (R) will NOT return to Astoria no matter how many times you propose it.

 

If people want service to Lower Manhattan, they can transfer at Woodhaven for the (E), it is that simple. No need to reroute every other DAM line through lower Manahattan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many times must we tell you the (R) will NOT return to Astoria no matter how many times you propose it.

If people want service to Lower Manhattan, they can transfer at Woodhaven for the (E), it is that simple. No need to reroute every other DAM line through lower Manahattan.

Or they can transfer - on the same platform - to the (A) at Broad Channel, Howard Beach or North Conduit

There is one big problem with the (M): It does not serve lower Manhattan.

I suspect for there to be backing, any line serving the RBB will have to serve lower Manhattan (especially to appease those, especially businesses who still think of lower Manhattan as "The Financial District" even if we know better).

For the five millionth time, Wallyhorse, the whole point of running of restoring the Rockaway Beach Line above Liberty Junction is to provide a more direct connection to Midtown Manhattan, NOT Lower Manhattan. Once again, there already is a direct line from the Rockaways to Lower Manhattan. It's called the (A) train! Want Lower Manhattan? Take the (A) train, not the (M) train! Got it? How many times must you copy and paste the same stupidly complicated service plan that inconveniences riders in South Brooklyn and on Queens Blvd and give the same bullshit reason every single goddamn time?

 

The (M) does have a problem, but not serving Lower Manhattan is not the problem. The problem with the (M) is that it interlines with four other routes, runs in Queens only on weekdays and with short trains. Any train serving the Rockaway Beach Line should be able to run seven days a week. Given the never-ending weekend service diversions on the Queens Blvd Line that knock out at least one track. That may change once the Queens Blvd CBTC signal project is completed. But right now, the diversions are still going on and that makes it impossible to run four QB services on just two or three tracks at acceptable levels.

 

Perhaps then the (R) is the better choice of the existing QBL locals to extend onto the Rockaway Beach branch, even though it's a much longer route than the (M). Though I prefer extending the (M) down to the Rockaways because it better serves Long Island City than the (R) and doesn't zigzag its way through Midtown the way the (R) does. And I don't really like the idea of leaving 67th Ave with just the (M) and its short trains on weekdays and having to send the (E) or (F) local on weekends to cover for the (M).

 

But really, the best option would be to run an SAS service down to Rockaway. Perhaps run the V as the 2nd Ave/Rockaway Beach service. But then it would need to run local on Queens Blvd, which would send the (M) to the express tracks and put the (F) on the Queens Blvd bypass tracks (if those ever get built).

Edited by T to Dyre Avenue
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or they can transfer - on the same platform - to the A at Broad Channel, Howard Beach or North Conduit

For the five millionth time, Wallyhorse, the whole point of running of restoring the Rockaway Beach Line above Liberty Junction is to provide a more direct connection to Midtown Manhattan, NOT Lower Manhattan. Once again, there already is a direct line from the Rockaways to Lower Manhattan. It's called the A train! Want Lower Manhattan? Take the A train, not the M train! Got it? How many times must you copy and paste the same stupidly complicated service plan that inconveniences riders in South Brooklyn and on Queens Blvd and give the same bullshit reason every single goddamn time?

 

The M does have a problem, but not serving Lower Manhattan is not the problem. The problem with the M is that it interlines with four other routes, runs in Queens only on weekdays and with short trains. Any train serving the Rockaway Beach Line should be able to run seven days a week. Given the never-ending weekend service diversions on the Queens Blvd Line that knock out at least one track. That may change once the Queens Blvd CBTC signal project is completed. But right now, the diversions are still going on and that makes it impossible to run four QB services on just two or three tracks at acceptable levels.

 

Perhaps then the (R) is the better choice of the existing QBL locals to extend onto the Rockaway Beach branch, even though it's a much longer route than the (M). Though I prefer extending the (M) down to the Rockaways because it better serves Long Island City than the (R) and doesn't zigzag its way through Midtown the way the (R) does. And I don't really like the idea of leaving 67th Ave with just the (M) and its short trains on weekdays and having to send the (E) or (F) local on weekends to cover for the (M).

 

But really, the best option would be to run an SAS service down to Rockaway. Perhaps run the V as the 2nd Ave/Rockaway Beach service. But then it would need to run local on Queens Blvd, which would send the (M) to the express tracks and put the (F) on the Queens Blvd bypass tracks (if those ever get built).

Again, I'm looking at it from a political standpoint. There are going to be those who will want it to serve lower Manhattan, especially I'm sure those where at or near where the Casino at Aqueduct is located.  There is still the mentality among some that lower Manhattan is "The financial district" and some would want to be able to go through there as opposed to Brooklyn to get to the Casino.

 

And the (R) 's natural route is sadly 95th-Astoria.  The reason I go back to that and have the (N) go with the (Q) via 2nd Avenue is so you eliminate the merges on Broadway while the (W) replaces the (R) along most of QB before going to the RBB.

 

Long term, I do agree an SAS service (especially if Phase 4 ever gets built) would be the way to do it because you can have such run from Hanover Square with the (T) that eventually would replace the (W) on the RBB as the main line.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, I'm looking at it from a political standpoint. There are going to be those who will want it to serve lower Manhattan, especially I'm sure those where at or near where the Casino at Aqueduct is located. There is still the mentality among some that lower Manhattan is "The financial district" and some would want to be able to go through there as opposed to Brooklyn to get to the Casino.

 

Then clearly you don't understand how politics work in this city...which I already figured when you kept bringing up Gale Brewer wanting to keep open the Manhattan portion of the (L) during the tunnel shutdown. Not to mention that whole nonsense about the Gov. Cuomo "pissing off Wall St" by shutting down the subway during what had turned out not to be a huge snowstorm. We don't need to be concerned about politicians who insist that a new subway service on the restored Rockaway Beach Branch serve the Financial District. We doneed to be concerned about politicians who insist that the Rockaway Beach Branch stay abandoned because in their narrow little minds, trains "bring in da noise, bring in da crime!" Folks like City Councilwoman Karen Koslowitz and State Assemblyman Andrew Hevesi, yes, these are the pols we need to be concerned about if we are serious about putting any kind of rail back on the Rockaway Beach Branch. Because they are serious about keeping it off. Old-school NIMBYism at its worst.

 

Oh, and just so you know...the (M) train DOES serve Lower Manhattan. Where do you think Broadway & Lafayette Street or Essex and Delancey streets are?

Edited by T to Dyre Avenue
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and just so you know...the (M) train DOES serve Lower Manhattan. Where do you think Broadway & Lafayette Street or Essex and Delancey streets are?

SoHo was the midtown of his days. The Financial District… that’s where all the real business and importance is at!

Again, I'm looking at it from a political standpoint. There are going to be those who will want it to serve lower Manhattan, especially I'm sure those where at or near where the Casino at Aqueduct is located.  There is still the mentality among some that lower Manhattan is "The financial district" and some would want to be able to go through there as opposed to Brooklyn to get to the Casino.

Why would they take a train that takes a huge detour around northern Queens to get to the Rockaways? The Financial District is served by the (A) which goes there as well. If I read your proposals correctly, you want two different train leaving in the opposite direction from the Financial District that both end up in the Rockaways.

Edited by CenSin
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, I'm looking at it from a political standpoint. There are going to be those who will want it to serve lower Manhattan, especially I'm sure those where at or near where the Casino at Aqueduct is located.  There is still the mentality among some that lower Manhattan is "The financial district" and some would want to be able to go through there as opposed to Brooklyn to get to the Casino.

 

And the (R) 's natural route is sadly 95th-Astoria.  The reason I go back to that and have the (N) go with the (Q) via 2nd Avenue is so you eliminate the merges on Broadway while the (W) replaces the (R) along most of QB before going to the RBB.

 

Long term, I do agree an SAS service (especially if Phase 4 ever gets built) would be the way to do it because you can have such run from Hanover Square with the (T) that eventually would replace the (W) on the RBB as the main line.  

 

I am too. Politicians will want service that is at least superficially reliable. And I think even they will realize that the (J)(Z) and (A) exist to get people to/from Lower Manhattan. 

 

Trains don't have natural routes. They have sensible routes. The (R) would be yardless if it runs to Astoria. So no. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The concern about capacity is way overblown. Even if you were to run (M) trains down the line every ten minutes, that would be many times over the capacity of all the bus routes that currently serve Woodhaven.

See, the thing is, its not overblown. Its a projection. I've lived in Rockaway since 1990. Ridership has increased in all of those years and with gentrification, a new housing boom, and businesses opening up down here, ridership has increased in just the last few years alone. I commute to midtown everyday. Between that, and current riders of the bus making the switch, there's going to be the demand if this line opens.

You can say "run the M every ten minutes", but there's problems with that 1)terminal capacity at Metropolitan WILL restrict the number of trains ran. 2) Rockaway residents want an express.

 

Then there's the summer factor. And trust when I tell you that during the summer, current trains can rival rush hour crowds easy.

Trust me on this man. This isn't a "wally horse" type thing. I lived down here, I commute from here, and I've worked the A line as a C/R. I'm not just spitting out nonsense.

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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