Governor Hochul seeks ‘alternatives’ to LaGuardia AirTrain

[Lawrence St]

4 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

You would have to be using it all hours to come to such conclusion given the ridership numbers at that station, and with the pandemic here, ridership patterns are changing.

It still dosen't matter. The point is people from Astoria have the  if they want to go to 49th St. The  needs to merge at 57th St and not at 34th St where the diverge speed is lower then the other.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

8 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

It still dosen't matter. The point is people from Astoria have the  if they want to go to 49th St. The  needs to merge at 57th St and not at 34th St where the diverge speed is lower then the other.

Your point is understood, but whether or not you're providing adequate evidence to support it is the question.

Edited November 14, 2021 by Via Garibaldi 8

[Theli11]

2 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Your point is understood, but whether or not you're providing adequate evidence to support it is the question.

But they wouldn't be affected if there  to 96th St and the  go to their respective parts of Queens. You'd actually have room for more service if there is no  service in the 60th St Tunnel. So yeah you might not have trains but the increased service would be enough to compensate Astoria riders. 

2 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

It still dosen't matter. The point is people from Astoria have the  if they want to go to 49th St. The  needs to merge at 57th St and not at 34th St where the diverge speed is lower then the other.

Of course, if you're just going to merge the  at 57th St then you're just moving the merge and not solving the actual problem which is the merge itself...

[Via Garibaldi 8]

30 minutes ago, Theli11 said:

But they wouldn't be affected if there  to 96th St and the  go to their respective parts of Queens. You'd actually have room for more service if there is no  service in the 60th St Tunnel. So yeah you might not have trains but the increased service would be enough to compensate Astoria riders.

I'm not disputing any of this. I'm simply trying to understand how many people would impacted by such a change. I will say that in general, I find local service on that line terrible along Broadway, especially on weekends. The  is just infrequent, and the  doesn't run on weekends, so the  is definitely needed then. Quite frankly, I do think that the  and  should run express on weekends and the  should run on weekends. That would be ideal.

Edited November 14, 2021 by Via Garibaldi 8

[mrsman]

The situation on Broadway really speaks to the needs for at least a minimal amount of deinterlining.  The impacts there are the most severe and the changes to the general structure of the ridership pattern, the least effected.

 96th/2nd - Broadway express - Brighton local

 96th/2nd - Broadway express - 4th Ave express - Sea Beach

 Forest Hills - QBL local- Broadway local - 4th Ave local - Bay Ridge

 Astoria - Broadway local- Whitehall

A pattern like the above would eliminate merging between local and exp tracks.  The number of trains allocated to each line may need to be slightly adjusted in order to make this work.  It would seem that some of the  trains should become  trains so as not to overload 96th/2.  At the same time, some of the  trains should become  trains to provide enough service for the Astoria line.  Of course, deinterlining would open up more capacity on all the lines, so a service increase on all Broadway services would be welcome, but if the service allocation is to be "revenue neutral", then overall fewer Q's and more W's would tend to be an effecive rebalancing to provide enough service to all the lines. It would be an overall increase on 2nd Ave, a slight decrease on the Broadway express, an increase on the Broadway local, and a slight decrease in Brighton local service.

Yes, 49th is an important stop.  49th would still be full reachable by Q or N trains with a cross platform transfer to a R or W.  Under the above plan, every train from Astoria will stop at 49th.

 

[CenSin]

On 11/15/2021 at 4:35 PM, mrsman said:

Yes, 49th is an important stop.  49th would still be full reachable by Q or N trains with a cross platform transfer to a R or W.  Under the above plan, every train from Astoria will stop at 49th.

49 Street has exits at both ends of the station: 47 Street at the south end and 49 Street (its namesake) at the north end. They are, however, both a mere 5~6 blocks away from the adjacent stations’ exits. 42 Street–Times Square’s northern exits are at 42~43 Streets, and 57 Street–7 Avenue’s southern exits are at 55 Street. If express trains start skipping the stop, the most plausible result is a shift in some traffic from 49 Street to both of the express stations. Given the shallow depth of all the Broadway stations, it’s not as dispiriting as having to use Lexington Avenue–63 Street instead of Lexington Avenue–59 Street.

[Eric B]

https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny-lga-subway-extension-hochul-mta-20211116-hxmy7hhmffhqrg6vfwuocna6lu-story.html

One thing I also just thought, is PA going to help pay for that? They got the Airtrains at the other two airports done quickly (and now actually completely redoing the one at NWK?) but we know how long it takes MTA to do a new subway extension; even a short one. That's another reason I liked Cuomo's idea. 

And then, the other ideas include bus lanes, but isn't that what the Q70 does? And then, light rail to the LIRR. If an Airtrain to Willet's Point is so “inefficient”, then isn't light rail the same thing (only being cheaper to construct, but still dealing with surface transit limitations)?

[Lawrence St]

1 hour ago, Eric B said:

https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny-lga-subway-extension-hochul-mta-20211116-hxmy7hhmffhqrg6vfwuocna6lu-story.html

One thing I also just thought, is PA going to help pay for that? They got the Airtrains at the other two airports done quickly (and now actually completely redoing the one at NWK?) but we know how long it takes MTA to do a new subway extension; even a short one. That's another reason I liked Cuomo's idea. 

And then, the other ideas include bus lanes, but isn't that what the Q70 does? And then, light rail to the LIRR. If an Airtrain to Willet's Point is so “inefficient”, then isn't light rail the same thing (only being cheaper to construct, but still dealing with surface transit limitations)?

If they have the Astoria extension continue up on 31st St and then right on 20th Av or 19th Av, the cost for the elevated construction will be low. If they do it the wrong way by having it turn on Steinway St, that's where the problem starts.

The Q70 is not a true BRT, idc what anyone says. It needs median bus lanes along the GCP.

[paulrivera]

Watch them make what was supposed to be the Triboro RX into a busway, then put an underground bus platform at the Roosevelt Avenue subway station, run the Q70 on it and call it a day.

 

[CenSin]

If they continue the Astoria Line by tunnelling under Flushing Bay to College Point, that area would get a pretty fast ride to midtown, possibly beating the which only runs express in one direction at any given time if it runs at all. 🤔

[P3F]

17 minutes ago, CenSin said:

If they continue the Astoria Line by tunnelling under Flushing Bay to College Point, that area would get a pretty fast ride to midtown, possibly beating the which only runs express in one direction at any given time if it runs at all. 🤔

That's something I've thought about in the past. If the Astoria line was underutilized, that would be a pretty cool way to take pressure off the . But the Astoria line already has high ridership, and although you could run extra service via the center track, I'm not sure the capacity for significantly more service exists on the Manhattan end.

[darkstar8983]

On 12/26/2021 at 8:24 PM, P3F said:

That's something I've thought about in the past. If the Astoria line was underutilized, that would be a pretty cool way to take pressure off the . But the Astoria line already has high ridership, and although you could run extra service via the center track, I'm not sure the capacity for significantly more service exists on the Manhattan end.

There is capacity in the 60 St tunnel and 59 St line between Queensboro Plaza and 57 St-7 Av for 23 trains per hour (I think thats how many are scheduled on the , but I understand the MTA only being able to run that much service because its an uneven merge (combined Astoria frequency of 14 TPH and Queens Blvd frequency of 9 TPH). Extending the line to LGA and wanting to run more service between Astoria and Manhattan would mean that the  would have to take a hit. But practically, the line that would get the service boost would be the  because the tracks the  runs on are at capacity (not counting 60th St, more  looking at the Manhattan Bridge / DeKalb Av Interlocking). The only way to add more service is on the local track, and the excess  trains can either short-turn at Canal St, or continue to Brooklyn via the  line. The service frequency could then be a combined 18 TPH for the  trains (9 for each route), and 6 TPH for the  train. The excess capacity needed on Queens Blvd Local can be covered by running 12 TPH on the . This way, there would be two trains for each  and three Astoria trains for every Queens Blvd train. Brooklyn  trains might have to go to Bay Ridge, or have the  end at Whitehall St (with ALL service to Brooklyn), but that can be considered to make sure Bay Ridge / 4 Av Local riders don't get their service slashed. The new extended  route would not be longer than the current , and the  would be shortened (hopefully making it less prone to delays.

[mrsman]

 

^^^^^^^

To squeeze more capacity out of the Broadway BMT line, deinterlining is necessary.   trains shifting from express to local eats up capacity significantly.  More trains can be run if all trains coming off the Bridge tracks (south side) stay on the Broadway express to 96th st and all or the trains coming off the Montague Tunnel stay on the Broadway local to either Astoria/LGA or QBL local.  

You are correct that a reallocation of some of the Broadway services may also be needed.  Some  to be sacrificed for an increase in  and  trains.

[Wallyhorse]

On 12/29/2021 at 4:48 PM, mrsman said:

To squeeze more capacity out of the Broadway BMT line, deinterlining is necessary.   trains shifting from express to local eats up capacity significantly.  More trains can be run if all trains coming off the Bridge tracks (south side) stay on the Broadway express to 96th st and all or the trains coming off the Montague Tunnel stay on the Broadway local to either Astoria/LGA or QBL local.  

You are correct that a reallocation of some of the Broadway services may also be needed.  Some  to be sacrificed for an increase in  and  trains.

If you want to do it this way:

 turns brown with the Nassau line reconfigured to where trains northbound use re-activated platforms at Canal Street and Bowery while this "Brown "  runs 95th-Bay Ridge to Canal Street, with most trains terminating on the current northbound/"southbound express" track (during peak hours, some  trains would terminate on the "northbound express" track at Canal),  This setup was not possible prior to the re-doing of Canal Street that eliminated the crossover between the northbound and southbound platforms from when Canal served as a terminal for trains coming off the Williamsburg Bridge.  Late nights and weekends, 

trains as part of this terminate at Chambers Street save for a select number of rush hour trains that continue to/begin at Broad Street (though late nights and weekends, when fewer trains are running, trains can continue to Broad Street)

 becomes a 24/7 line and operates as follows:
All Times except late nights: 9th Avenue station to Astoria via the tunnel,  Trains on yard runs end and begin at Bay Parkway on the
(Note: During peak hours, some trains end and begin at Whitehall Street or at the tunnel level of Canal Street)

Late nights: Whitehall Street OR 34th Street-Broadway to Astoria. 

: No Change except late nights, operates via the tunnel. 

: Runs current route to 57th Street-7th Avenue, then runs with the to 63rd/Lex and then with the on Queens Boulevard as a full-time express to Union Turnpike and replaces the  to Jamaica Center.  Late nights does operate via 4th avenue local via the Montague Tunnel and Broadway local with the via 60th Street.

 becomes a full-time local on Queens Boulevard to 71st-Continental. 

[N6 Limited]

https://www.masstransitmag.com/rail/infrastructure/article/21250912/private-company-offers-laguardia-airtrain-alternative

Quote

Private company offers LaGuardia AirTrain alternative

Dec. 21, 2021

The three-phase proposal was sent to New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, PANYNJ and MTA and designed with an eye toward enhancing NEC rail services.

Mischa Wanek-Libman

AmeriStarRail

Phase 3 map of AmeriStarRail's proposal.

A private sector company is proposing a way to deliver rail service to LaGuardia Airport and improve Northeast Corridor and Empire Corridor rail with higher frequency and higher performance service.

In a letter sent to New York Gov. Kathy Hochul and shared with Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ), AmeriStarRail proposes a three-phased approach that will eventually provide Metro-North passengers with direct connections to JFK and Long Island Rail Road passengers with direct connections to LaGuardia.

The three phases proposed are:

Phase 1: AirTrain LaGuardia express trains operating within the available track capacity of the N route from City Hall to Astoria where shuttle buses would connect customers to each LaGuardia Terminal.

Phase 2: Construct elevated tracks and two new stations to bring trains to each terminal at LaGuardia and utilize the same technology currently in use on AirTrain JFK.

Phase 3: Extend AirTrain LaGuardia over the Van Wyck Expressway to connect with the existing AirTrain JFK at Jamaica.

“AmeriStarRail’s AirTrain LaGuardia/JFK System will provide Manhattan and the New York region with a bigger, bolder, better way to finally bring rail transit service to LaGuardia Airport” said Scott Spencer, AmeriStarRail’s COO. “Trains are the most sustainable, climate friendly form of transportation. With the new AirTrain LaGuardia/JFK System, airport passengers/workers from the New York region and Queens communities along the route will have an innovative way to go easy on the environment and go by train.”

The original proposal to link LaGuardia via train called for a connection between New York City Transit Services and Long Island Rail Road at Mets-Willets Point, which critics labeled too expensive and questioned the estimated traffic reductions of the project.

In October, Gov. Hochul requested PANYNJ review alternative options for the project. PANYNJ named a panel of three transportation experts in November and tasked them with evaluating transit options to LaGuardia.

AmeriStarRail’s letter notes its proposal is the result of “significant time, effort and resources” and noted the company is available to discuss with stakeholders once the plan is analyzed.

Interesting proposal, it's almost like the original AirTrain plan. I like the connection to Jamaica via Willets PT, they might have resistance with a connection to the Astoria Line.

Wouldn't there be a funding issue sharing a service on the Broadway/Astoria line? (IIRC, that's why the JFK AirTrain had to be completely isolated), unless they're suggesting the create a new  service on the express tracks and middle track through LIC/Astoria (with headway long enough to allow it).

[rbrome]

5 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

Wouldn't there be a funding issue sharing a service on the Broadway/Astoria line? (IIRC, that's why the JFK AirTrain had to be completely isolated), unless they're suggesting the create a new  service on the express tracks and middle track through LIC/Astoria (with headway long enough to allow it).

The gov't did change the rules recently on the allowed scope of airport rail projects. It might be allowed now. 

But I do think the MTA operating that part makes much more sense. They did run a dedicated airport express service once before, but I don't know if they have any appetite to do it again. It might not even be feasible to interline that way and maintain desired service levels on the existing lines. 

[T to Dyre Avenue]

6 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

https://www.masstransitmag.com/rail/infrastructure/article/21250912/private-company-offers-laguardia-airtrain-alternative

Interesting proposal, it's almost like the original AirTrain plan. I like the connection to Jamaica via Willets PT, they might have resistance with a connection to the Astoria Line.

Wouldn't there be a funding issue sharing a service on the Broadway/Astoria line? (IIRC, that's why the JFK AirTrain had to be completely isolated), unless they're suggesting the create a new  service on the express tracks and middle track through LIC/Astoria (with headway long enough to allow it).

Even if funding isn't the main issue, it will likely be an issue. And it won't be the only one. AmeriStarRail are calling for rail service from City Hall to Astoria in Phase 1 of their plan. This service would require multiple merging in Manhattan, especially if the plan includes also running it express in Manhattan. I'm assuming that is part of their plan because their map shows only the Broadway express stations plus Queensboro Plaza and Ditmars (which they call "Astoria Exchange Station"). I think it would just be easier to reimagine the  as the dedicated express service in AmeriStarRail's Phase 1, with dedicated shuttle buses that meet the  at Astoria Blvd (not Ditmars; there's not enough street space there). But it would have to run local in Manhattan because you can't run express trains from City Hall Lower Level without first merging onto the local tracks before Canal, then onto the express tracks before Prince. Add that on top of the delays already incurred under the current service plan, and you've got a recipe for a major shitshow if a signal or a train dies somewhere along the way (like what happened at Canal St this morning).

As for Phase 2, I'm of the mind that since they already want to connect a train to the  at Ditmars, why not just have the  and/or  continue all the way to LGA? Why make people take the airport train to Ditmars then transfer there? It just seems counterintuitive.

Phase 3, I'm still on the fence over. Because it's basically the Cuomo AirTrain proposal, but continuing south to JFK. Maybe the AirTrain type technology could be done there since we already have it, but really I'd prefer a service that benefits more than just airport riders. 

Edited January 28, 2022 by T to Dyre Avenue

[Lex]

6 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

https://www.masstransitmag.com/rail/infrastructure/article/21250912/private-company-offers-laguardia-airtrain-alternative

The first thing that comes to mind with that proposal is "gadgetbahn".

Rather than trying to, say, extend the Astoria Line (hell, it could even continue on to Flushing and take some pressure off the  in the process), they decide to build all this extra shit for a ridiculously long connection between airports with far too few stops in between to even remotely justify the design on top of trying to force another JFK Express that shares the same fundamental flaw of not even remotely serving terminals while eating whatever remaining track capacity may exist on needless station-skipping and a possible premium fare.

[GojiMet86]

Is there even that much demand between JFK and LaGuardia?

[Lex]

40 minutes ago, GojiMet86 said:

Is there even that much demand between JFK and LaGuardia?

Not to mention that you'd still have to go through airport security at either airport...

[Cait Sith]

3 minutes ago, GojiMet86 said:

Is there even that much demand between JFK and LaGuardia?

Pre-COVID, I wouldn't doubt it. There were a lot of shuttles between JFK and LGA.

[Eric B]

According to the map legend, the Astoria-LGA section is "Airtrain Skytrail (atop Airtrain)" [Green] above "Airtrain using JFK technology" [light blue], like the LGA-JFK section (with the exception of the TBD portions), yet the description says the first portion is a shuttle bus.

And I'm not even seeing a description of the "Skytrail" (though the map says something about a "linear park".

[bobtehpanda]

15 minutes ago, Eric B said:

According to the map legend, the Astoria-LGA section is "Airtrain Skytrail (atop Airtrain)" [Green] above "Airtrain using JFK technology" [light blue], like the LGA-JFK section (with the exception of the TBD portions), yet the description says the first portion is a shuttle bus.

And I'm not even seeing a description of the "Skytrail" (though the map says something about a "linear park".

A linear park is something like the High Line.

Personally, the last place I want to be when going for a jog is choking on vehicle exhaust on top of the Van Wyck.

[Eric B]

So they want to put that over the whole Airtrain? 

Still wonder why it isn't mentiomned n the descriptions, and the map doesn;t show a shuttle bus. I guess the map was made earlier, and they changed it and eliminated the Skytrail and rail extension to Astoria?

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Hey, look what we’ve got here. It’s the PA’s newest alternatives study for transit links to LaGuardia…

https://www.anewlga.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/LGA-Mass-Transit-Access-Evaluation-March-2022.pdf
 

And here’s your chance to comment on them…

https://mobile.twitter.com/ByERussell/status/1499136750953893889/photo/1

And, please, nobody speak in favor of the “emerging technologies” alternative. That’s probably fancy-speak for “Tesla Tunnel.” NYC needs one of those about as much as an apple needs a worm.