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.
Union Tpke

There will be no N trains between 86 St Brooklyn and Coney Island-Stillwell October 21, 2019 to Spring 2020

Recommended Posts

Preparing for Climate Change: Protecting the Coney Island Yard 

There will be no N trains between 86 St Brooklyn and Coney Island-Stillwell October 21, 2019 to Spring 2020

The Coney Island Yard, the tracks that serve it, the car wash, repair, and maintenance facilities within it, and the infrastructure that runs through it are critical to our subway operations. The location of the yard provides ideal access to multiple subway lines, but it's vulnerable to flooding. With intense weather events like Superstorm Sandy expected to occur more often, we need to act now to protect this vital part of our system, so we can keep trains running safely.

To do the work to protect the yard as efficiently and safely as possible, we need uninterrupted access to the track. This means that between October 21, 2019, and Spring 2020, there will be no N trains between 86 St and Coney Island-Stillwell Av. You'll want to transfer to the D and the F, or use the B1 and B4 buses to complete your trip. Here's what we're doing and how you'll get around while we work.

Getting To and From Coney Island-Stillwell Av

Beginning October 21, 2019, through Spring 2020, there will be no N trains between 86 St and Coney Island-Stillwell Av.

For service to and from Coney Island, you'll want to transfer to the D or F lines. Remember these key transfer points:

36 St D/N/R (cross-platform)

62 St-New Utrecht Av D/N (ADA accessible station)

During this project, we're providing a free out-of-system transfer between the N at 86 St and the F at Avenue X. It's about a 5-minute walk. You can also connect to/from the F by using the B1 or B4 buses, which will also accept an additional free transfer when using a MetroCard. Customers making this connection will be able to do so with one fare when using a MetroCard.

https://new.mta.info/system_modernization/coneyislandyard

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said:

Sea Beach riders can never get a break lol...

Yup! Maybe they are doing this to boost their case for the <F>!

  • LMAO! 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Union Tpke said:

Yup! Maybe they are doing this to boost their case for the <F>!

Looks like I’d better get used to that <F>. I have a better chance of getting an express ride from it than a (Q) and (B).

Share this post


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

Looks like I’d better get used to that <F>. I have a better chance of getting an express ride from it than a (Q) and (B).

Don't you folks also have the (D), which runs express as well (after 36th)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If service along Fourth Avenue Express was increased, and with the mess at DeKalb fixed, a <D> via West End Express wouldn't be bad at all. It would save a decent amount of time for riders. You just need enough local service. There is so much potential for increased service on Sixth Avenue Express! With deinterlining, get 30 TPH, with CBTC, you could get 33+, and with open gangways and 60 foot cars you can increase capacity further. Don't buy it when people say that the subway is at capacity.

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

Don't you folks also have the (D), which runs express as well (after 36th)?

The (D) is nearly the worst of the bunch. It is slower than the (Q) despite being express. The (D) can owe its long run time to all those curves along the West End branch. The (N) is generally the best when it runs without delay, with the (Q) following closely behind. The West End express doesn’t do much better than regular Sea Beach service. A <Q> or <N> from Coney Island–Stillwell Avenue would be the fastest of the bunch (which I timed during one of those full express GOs). I’m still figuring out how the <F> ranks among these options.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

Don't you folks also have the (D), which runs express as well (after 36th)?

The (D) is arguably the slowest of the four. It takes forever to get off West End.

47 minutes ago, Union Tpke said:

Yup! Maybe they are doing this to boost their case for the <F>!

Then they should have run more than two a day

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, CenSin said:

The (D) is nearly the worst of the bunch. It is slower than the (Q) despite being express. The (D) can owe its long run time to all those curves along the West End branch. The (N) is generally the best when it runs without delay, with the (Q) following closely behind. The West End express doesn’t do much better than regular Sea Beach service. A <Q> or <N> from Coney Island–Stillwell Avenue would be the fastest of the bunch (which I timed during one of those full express GOs). I’m still figuring out how the <F> ranks among these options.

I was just pointing out another option However, In addition to subway, there are a plethora of bus options to get to those subway options as well. (B) and (Q) crowds from Kings Hwy aren't that crazy so you can use that as well.

For the <F>, I can tell you that two trains per hour is a joke as people will stumble upon it than wait for it (I was told that long ago before I got into long term subway plans). If it were ten trains (a la my plan for the (V)), then it would be more desirable.

1 minute ago, Around the Horn said:

Then they should have run more than two a day

With the way we have our system run, its either half the number of Culver local trains or eliminate the (M) in favor of a second Culver service. Either option does not sound appealing.

But if we had a way to make a direct connections between the Jamaica EL tracks and the 8th Avenue tracks, then everyone can get what they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

I was just pointing out another option However, In addition to subway, there are a plethora of bus options to get to those subway options as well. (B) and (Q) crowds from Kings Hwy aren't that crazy so you can use that as well.

For the <F>, I can tell you that two trains per hour is a joke as people will stumble upon it than wait for it (I was told that long ago before I got into long term subway plans). If it were ten trains (a la my plan for the (V)), then it would be more desirable.

With the way we have our system run, its either half the number of Culver local trains or eliminate the (M) in favor of a second Culver service. Either option does not sound appealing.

But if we had a way to make a direct connections between the Jamaica EL tracks and the 8th Avenue tracks, then everyone can get what they want.

The bus doesn’t sound all too appealing as even the limited bus is the equivalent of a super-local. I’d rather take whatever train is nearest to me than go a little further for an express. For me, that’s going to be the (F) or (Q).

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

If service along Fourth Avenue Express was increased, and with the mess at DeKalb fixed, a <D> via West End Express wouldn't be bad at all. It would save a decent amount of time for riders. You just need enough local service. There is so much potential for increased service on Sixth Avenue Express! With deinterlining, get 30 TPH, with CBTC, you could get 33+, and with open gangways and 60 foot cars you can increase capacity further. Don't buy it when people say that the subway is at capacity.

@Lex What don't you understand about what I said? I'm willing to clarify what was not clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any info on whether yard access will be maintained from 86th Street? Presumably at least a train's length past the switches needs to be available for the relay, but I'm not sure what exactly is going to be blocked during the construction. If yard access is not maintained, it will be interesting to see how (N) and (W) trains deadhead to the Sea Beach line.

 

@RR503 Any idea of the potential terminal capacity of the 86th Street relay? I haven't checked the schedule in a while, but I believe the (N) runs a max of 10 tph including the ones signed as (Q) via Sea Beach.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, P3F said:

@RR503 Any idea of the potential terminal capacity of the 86th Street relay? I haven't checked the schedule in a while, but I believe the (N) runs a max of 10 tph including the ones signed as (Q) via Sea Beach.

Yes, it's 10. It'll actually be really interesting to see what happens. I haven't ever observed relays at 86, so am unsure of how exactly they run it. The constraint I see is the fact that the x-over just south of the station is only in the facing-point direction, which will likely limit them to a one-pocket op. You can turn 10tph on a single pocket, but that does require some basic discipline that is sometimes lacking at NYCT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With this short-turn at 86 St on the (N) next month, in November, will they increase the headways on the Coney Island (F) side instead of waiting 12-15 mins on the weekends to the regular 8-10 minutes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Calvin said:

With this short-turn at 86 St on the (N) next month, in November, will they increase the headways on the Coney Island (F) side instead of waiting 12-15 mins on the weekends to the regular 8-10 minutes?

You meant decrease the headways? Generally, it’s good to increase the frequency; the frequency is inverse to the headway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Calvin said:

With this short-turn at 86 St on the (N) next month, in November, will they increase the headways on the Coney Island (F) side instead of waiting 12-15 mins on the weekends to the regular 8-10 minutes?

You can’t reduce weekend (F) headways. Too much flagging. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If only there were a fifth track somewhere on the Sixth Avenue Line for short-turns! That would solve this issue, and could have allowed for (F)s that can't fit on Queens Boulevard to terminate in Manhattan.

Alas.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Union Tpke said:

If only there were a fifth track somewhere on the Sixth Avenue Line for short-turns! That would solve this issue, and could have allowed for (F)s that can't fit on Queens Boulevard to terminate in Manhattan.

Alas.

Is there no way to add a layup track east of Lexington Av-63rd St? I thought there was a bellmouth there, or am I thinking of the SAS one?

Edited by Lawrence St

Share this post


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

Is there no way to add a layup track east of Lexington Av-63rd St? I thought there was a bellmouth there, or am I thinking of the SAS one?

The only bell mouths at 63rd Street are for SAS. 

@Union Tpke Too bad that wasn’t the case with 57th Street.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

The only bell mouths at 63rd Street are for SAS. 

@Union Tpke Too bad that wasn’t the case with 57th Street.

Well, that extra terminal facility would have been Northern Boulevard (the 63 Street analogue to 53 Street’s Queens Plaza). But they never built the bypass, and now 63 Street’s capacity is tied to Queens Boulevard’s capacity. Had the bypass been built as planned, the short-turn track would be just under Queens Plaza—a good place to short-turn excess trains, if you ask me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

The only bell mouths at 63rd Street are for SAS. 

@Union Tpke Too bad that wasn’t the case with 57th Street.

Precisely what I was thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a reason why Roosevelt Av upper level was built with track connections to the east instead of the west?

Share this post


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

Is there a reason why Roosevelt Av upper level was built with track connections to the east instead of the west?

Apparently, it was supposed to be a terminal with track connections to the mainline, much like the (H)’s Court Street terminal. The IND had this idea that through trains would be express and local trains would remain within the borough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't the (N) cut back to 86th Street back when they reconstructed Stillwell Av in the 2000's? Must be frustrating for recurring Sea Beach riders to have to deal with this again albeit for a different issue this time.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, M5viaRiverside said:

Wasn't the (N) cut back to 86th Street back when they reconstructed Stillwell Av in the 2000's? Must be frustrating for recurring Sea Beach riders to have to deal with this again albeit for a different issue this time.

IIRC, Sea Beach got heavily flooded during Sandy back in 2012, and they just want to prepare for another storm if possible.

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.