How would you bring back subway services

[randomnewyorker23]

Idk but the rockaway park  should be renamed to  externally on maps and rollsigns period point blank.

The  is a subway line everyone wants back but knows good and well it likely won't, then again the  is nearly a loop and something should be done with it. IF we restore the , it's last stop cannot be 2 Av. We can't easily restore  service like we did with the . Plus it's slots are already filled by  &  trains, so there's almost no point.

The  is never coming back. They've already removed all  programs from the R142/A.

The  is ambiguous, I have like several different ideas if the MTA were to reintroduce said letter back into the system.

[randomnewyorker23]

Also one more thing. If were going to bring back the , it's last stop can't be Broad St or Bay Parkway.

[Vulturious]

6 hours ago, randomnewyorker23 said:

Idk but the rockaway park  should be renamed to  externally on maps and rollsigns period point blank.

The  is a subway line everyone wants back but knows good and well it likely won't, then again the  is nearly a loop and something should be done with it. IF we restore the , it's last stop cannot be 2 Av. We can't easily restore  service like we did with the . Plus it's slots are already filled by  &  trains, so there's almost no point.

The  is never coming back. They've already removed all  programs from the R142/A.

The  is ambiguous, I have like several different ideas if the MTA were to reintroduce said letter back into the system.

6 hours ago, randomnewyorker23 said:

Also one more thing. If were going to bring back the , it's last stop can't be Broad St or Bay Parkway.

The Rockaway Park  doesn't need to be renamed back to the , it's a shuttle line.

Why are you assuming everyone wants the  back? While I agree that the  shouldn't terminate at 2 Av, the better option would be to send it to Church Av with the . This way the  can run full time express during the weekdays, no one would complain because they still have their direct Manhattan service. However, that can't happen because the  has become a great success. Shame that it took the  to be forced in running this kind of service because of budget cuts.

There's no good reason whatsoever to bring back the  of course. Only way they should is to convert some stations into express stations and have a lower level single tunnel that is between Dyckman St and 145 St along the  for peak express service. Even that is complicated.

I'm both interested in hearing what you got for the , but also scared because I get the feeling it'll end up making things worse. Personally, if there was a line that was to be renamed, it would be the  to Lefferts. By that, I mean rename all  to Lefferts as the  so there is no more confusion for passengers wanting service to JFK. Because of the  getting NTT's, it'll be much easier and would basically run the same way the  and  runs currently.

As for the , there is no way to bring back that line anymore. As someone that rode the  to be disappointed in hearing myself say that, it just can't. The  has done a better job. While I agree the last stop shouldn't be Broad St, I don't agree with the Bay Parkway part. That stop has actually helped West End riders have something, especially since West End for a very long time has had a supplement line that being the . It is a better stop compared to Broad St and there isn't any other place to run it either. Brighton riders won't want the  and neither would other riders. While Bay Ride could benefit the extra service, it isn't the best terminal because it's 2 tracks only. It sucks that the   doesn't run to Bay Parkway, it would be very beneficial.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

But there is a third track between 86th and 95th Streets. Unfortunately, it only has switches at the south end of the track, so trains can only access this middle track from 95th St. What they could (and perhaps should) do is install two switches at the north end of the track. This way, a second 4th Ave local service can terminate at 86th St - which is a very well-used station - while the  terminates at 95th St exclusively. 

As for the V, yes I don’t think it’s coming back as a 6th Ave service. Maybe it might come back as a second 2nd Ave service. Maybe it should, so that SAS south of the 63rd St Tunnel can have an equal or near-equal amount of service as north of 63rd. 

[randomnewyorker23]

The  is the best option if we were to reintroduce a letter into the system.

The H is used internally for the Rockaway Park Shuttle

I is too similar to the number 1 so it is not used (Unless you use the two lines that are at the ends of the I in several fonts (Helvetica & Akzidenz-Grotesk not being either of those)

O is for a similar reason to I, but it's with 0 instead of 1.

P has been used for several proposed routes that never wore

T is already earmarked for the 2nd Avenue Subway

U sounds too similar to the word "you."

V was a line but it got cut and chances of it being used as a subway line is very very slim.

X is preserved for R32 rollsigns but it's never used

Y sounds similar to the word "why."

(Also why did they use / as the new 2001 services, I mean W is fine but the jump from F all the way to V was weird.)

 

[randomnewyorker23]

Also they really should've used a letter closer to F (G is out of the question for obvious reasons, maybe H?)

[Vulturious]

41 minutes ago, randomnewyorker23 said:

The  is the best option if we were to reintroduce a letter into the system.

The H is used internally for the Rockaway Park Shuttle

I is too similar to the number 1 so it is not used (Unless you use the two lines that are at the ends of the I in several fonts (Helvetica & Akzidenz-Grotesk not being either of those)

O is for a similar reason to I, but it's with 0 instead of 1.

P has been used for several proposed routes that never wore

T is already earmarked for the 2nd Avenue Subway

U sounds too similar to the word "you."

V was a line but it got cut and chances of it being used as a subway line is very very slim.

X is preserved for R32 rollsigns but it's never used

Y sounds similar to the word "why."

(Also why did they use / as the new 2001 services, I mean W is fine but the jump from F all the way to V was weird.)

 

There's really no way to reintroduce the  back without moving around other lines in the process. I've been seeing a lot of posts that reintroduces the  as a second 8 Av line that runs along QBL either local or express with the . The  is pretty redundant if they were to bring it back the way it was before it was cut because the  is in the way which most people want to take that instead.

The  was introduced because 63 St was being connected to QBL. IIRC, originally the  was supposed to run via 63 St with the  continuing along 53 St. However, plans changed because people preferred having the  via 63 St (personally, that wasn't a good idea because it basically screwed up the interlining and made QBL worse). It took that name because there weren't any other letters available to use. The  is internal for the Rockaway Park Shuttle so they couldn't have used it regardless. 

As for the , it was basically the Yellow B's child running the same service pattern from Ditmars Blvd to Coney Island via Astoria local (with express service iirc), 60 St, Broadway express, Manhattan Bridge, 4 Av express, and West End local. Essentially, it's the  rerouted via West End. It was created because they didn't want to bring back the Yellow B and D probably because people would've been confused during the Manhattan Bridge construction of the north side. So they brought in the  and  as the replacement to alleviate confusion.

[mrsman]

The Rockaway Park shuttle should actually just simply be redesignated as the  .  Both internally and on signs, maps, and the like.

The 42nd shuttle can be redesignated as a purple 8.  Yes, not the trackage of  but essentially follows the same routing connecting two of its major stations.

This will leave the Franklin Ave shuttle as the sole  train.

Part of my deinterlining plans provide for 4 services along 8th Ave:  &M as the locals,  &  as express

4 services along 6the Ave:  & K as the locals, and  &  as the express

3 services along Broadway:   as local,  and  as express.

WIthout getting into too many details of the reroutes of all of the above, the new letter Orange-K is a service that starts at Jamaica Center in Queens, runs express from Union Turnpike to Queensbridge, goes over the 63rd street tunnel, runs local along 6th Ave, then switches south of W4th to what are now the 8th Ave local tracks (but running under 6th and Church) and ending at WTC.  It is quite similar to today's  , except that it runs along 6th Ave  and the 63rd street tunnel.

Since I have 4 8th Ave services, I need a new letter for one of the services.  I use M, since I route an 8th Ave local through the W4th switches to the Williamsburg Bridge and then to Myrtle, so it seems appropriate to call this an M train, since it still follows the M routing south of W4.  But pushing the M to 8th Ave would mean that I need a new designation for my 4th 6th Ave service, so I bring back the K.

[It is a deinterlining plan making heavy use of the W4th switches.  6th Ave locals head to WTC or Fulton.  8th Ave locals head east on Houston to Culver or Myrtle lines.]

The letters that I use in my plans: A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, J, K, L, M, N, Q, R, S , Z.  The new routings are the H as the current Rockaway Park shuttle and the K as described above.  Most of the letter routes do something different, but run along part of their traditional routings.  G, J, L, Q, S, and Z are unchanged from today's pattern.  

 

[mrsman]

If any are interested in seeing my plan, I posted a basic outline of it on 8/11/2021 at the top of page 7 of the "De-interlining problem or solution" thread.

https://www.nyctransitforums.com/topic/51985-de-interlining-problem-or-solution/page/7/#comments

My plan is basically the same as posted there, with a few changes of designation:

What I labelled  in that thread is now a blue-M, since it serves Myrtle.

The  mentioned in the other thread will have Far Rockaway trains labelled as  and Lefferts trains labelled as  .  Aside from this,  and  are identical in the new plan.

What I labelled  in that thread, is now my orange-K that I explained above.

Orange-H in that thread is now to be referred to as  in the new plan.  I made this change to keep  along 179th, since that is more familiar.

I dump the Brown-K and continue to refer to that as  .  Even though it is a pet peeve,  is more familiar as the skip-stop  alternate, leaving K for the new 6th Ave service.

 

For any comments on the general operation of the plan, please refer to the plan in the de-interling thread and make comments in that thread.  The new designations break the "purist" lettering scheme that I had on 8/11/21, but it preserves H on the Rockaway Park shuttle and also preserves  to 179th and M to Metropolitan Ave.