Is there abandoned subway infrastructure out there that very few or no one knows exists?

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

First I want to give credit to Vanshnookenraggen's very detailed and accurate track map of NYC rail system; it's what inspired this thread.

 

There are a lot of normally inaccessible shells and tunnels that don't actually connect with the rest of the system but we know they exist (South 4th Street, Staten Island Tunnel provision, Utica Av Upper Level, ect).

I wonder if it's likely there might be other small segments of tunnel or station shell out there that have just been lost to history. For example, Ik there's a lot of speculation from time to time around 76th street and from my research I tend to believe it doesn't exist even as a shell, though I could see the tunnel continuing a bit past the Cinderblock wall.

Honestly it'd be really cool if we discovered something unexpected one day as has happened in London fairly recently iirc (though there rail infrastructure is far more extensive overall).

[zacster]

I discovered something in plain sight last year that nobody seemed to know about on the other forum.  At Queensboro Plaza there are trackway leads to the never built BRT Crosstown El.  They are visible under the current tracks leading to the Flushing line and went from the upper and lower level south side tracks of the BRT/BMT side of the station, the part that was torn down.  Built on top of those trackways was the turnaround tail track that was parallel to the Flushing line that goes almost all the way to 33rd St.  But if you look at it you can see those trackways were originally pointed straight at Jackson Avenue.  The plans to construct the line were scrapped from the Dual Contracts early on in process, but did appear in an original document.  It would have allowed subway trains to continue south on Jackson towards Brooklyn as an el, basically following the current G train IND line that was eventually built.  But unlike the IND, this would have connected to the Manhattan bound tracks and could continue in. 

It surprised me that I'd discovered something that nobody knew existed, probably because the tail tracks were constructed on it instead.  You can see though that they were added later, and nobody disputes that fact.  QBP is a tangle of tracks and trackways that is hard to follow because the north BMT side was torn down.  There are a lot of dead ends and trackways.  You also have the 2nd Ave El connector going over the bridge still visible.  The sad thing about that is it lasted all of 25 years.

Another thing I've seen but have not been able to verify is that the West End line appears to have originally been planned to go straight down Stillwell Ave to Coney Island, not swerve into the yard to meet up with the Sea Beach.  The typical 3 track dual contract structure comes to an abrupt end beyond Bay 50th St. whereas at 9th Ave the structure curves along into the stop.  Why would they build the structure that way on one side and not the other?

I've posted pictures of almost every abandoned el connector over on Subchat, including these, all taken by myself and all reached by bicycle.

And speaking of Stillwell Ave, my car is at one of the many collision shops there and I want it back!

[Lawrence St]

At Bedford Park Blvd, prior to going northbound, there are a lot of unused track space rising and coming down. I tried to find an explanation for this but could never find a reason.

At Park Place , there is still remains of a staircase to street level on the former exterior part of the platform.

[trainfan22]

76th Street is the only one where no one knows whether it exists or not AFAIK

 

 

Not the subway but IIRC remnants of an LIRR steam train was found under Atlantic Ave.

 

 

EDIT: Heres an wikipedia page about the LIRR tunnel

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobble_Hill_Tunnel

 

 

https://gothamist.com/arts-entertainment/why-an-1830s-locomotive-appears-to-be-trapped-under-brooklyn-streets

Edited February 17, 2023 by trainfan22

[Lawrence St]

The Church Ave Trolley Tunnel still exists, although it is sealed.

The former Times Square  43rd St exit still exists, but is sealed from street level. 
 

A remnant of the Lexington Ave Elevated remains in a building along the former routing.

Along the never-completed  extension, there are subway grates installed in portions where the subway dosent exist. (Or does it?)

 

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

5 hours ago, zacster said:

I discovered something in plain sight last year that nobody seemed to know about on the other forum.  At Queensboro Plaza there are trackway leads to the never built BRT Crosstown El.  They are visible under the current tracks leading to the Flushing line and went from the upper and lower level south side tracks of the BRT/BMT side of the station, the part that was torn down.  Built on top of those trackways was the turnaround tail track that was parallel to the Flushing line that goes almost all the way to 33rd St.  But if you look at it you can see those trackways were originally pointed straight at Jackson Avenue.  The plans to construct the line were scrapped from the Dual Contracts early on in process, but did appear in an original document.  It would have allowed subway trains to continue south on Jackson towards Brooklyn as an el, basically following the current G train IND line that was eventually built.  But unlike the IND, this would have connected to the Manhattan bound tracks and could continue in. 

It surprised me that I'd discovered something that nobody knew existed, probably because the tail tracks were constructed on it instead.  You can see though that they were added later, and nobody disputes that fact.  QBP is a tangle of tracks and trackways that is hard to follow because the north BMT side was torn down.  There are a lot of dead ends and trackways.  You also have the 2nd Ave El connector going over the bridge still visible.  The sad thing about that is it lasted all of 25 years.

Another thing I've seen but have not been able to verify is that the West End line appears to have originally been planned to go straight down Stillwell Ave to Coney Island, not swerve into the yard to meet up with the Sea Beach.  The typical 3 track dual contract structure comes to an abrupt end beyond Bay 50th St. whereas at 9th Ave the structure curves along into the stop.  Why would they build the structure that way on one side and not the other?

I've posted pictures of almost every abandoned el connector over on Subchat, including these, all taken by myself and all reached by bicycle.

And speaking of Stillwell Ave, my car is at one of the many collision shops there and I want it back!

I need to go seriously check out Queens Blvd seriously someday; both Bway Junction and Queens Blvd are a really interesting set of tangled tracks and ROWs, many of which are now abandoned. Doing a breif Google Map search and it from streetview; very interesting find.

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

3 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

The Church Ave Trolley Tunnel still exists, although it is sealed.

The former Times Square  43rd St exit still exists, but is sealed from street level. 
 

A remnant of the Lexington Ave Elevated remains in a building along the former routing.

Along the never-completed  extension, there are subway grates installed in portions where the subway dosent exist. (Or does it?)

 

For the Lexington Avenue Elevated may I ask which building; I was looking around on Google Maps but couldn'[t find anything. Is it similar to the ROWs through industrial buildings for the torn down part of the High Line that can still be seen pretty clearly at google maps?

 

As for the , I can see grates on 158th Street in Queens (where we know the tunnel exists with tracks), but don't see anything past that. Is there something I'm missing?

 

Very interesting finds.

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

3 hours ago, trainfan22 said:

76th Street is the only one where no one knows whether it exists or not AFAIK

 

 

Not the subway but IIRC remnants of an LIRR steam train was found under Atlantic Ave.

 

 

EDIT: Heres an wikipedia page about the LIRR tunnel

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobble_Hill_Tunnel

 

 

https://gothamist.com/arts-entertainment/why-an-1830s-locomotive-appears-to-be-trapped-under-brooklyn-streets

Cobble Hill Tunnel is like the classic example of something being lost to history and being re-discovered; seems the tunnel stayed in surprisingly good condition.

The main reason I have doubts about 76th Street existing as a station or a shell is because if that were the case, the MTA would have to do regular maintenance to ensure it doesn't collapse and word would've gotten around it definitively exists. There's also the lack of subway grates past where we know for sure the tracks end. It could've been filled in at some point but surely that would've been a noteworthy endeavor that would have documentation, plus, they would only fill it in if something was very *very* wrong.

Also rmbr it started as an April Fool's day joke, but after that people went out of their way seek out evidence, which is flimsy at best.

I think at best the tracks might continue a bit past the cinderblock wall. I do believe the Cinderblock wall is unique for a reason though, and that there was clear intention to continue past that point.

[N6 Limited]

On 2/16/2023 at 11:00 PM, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

As for the , I can see grates on 158th Street in Queens (where we know the tunnel exists with tracks), but don't see anything past that. Is there something I'm missing?

On 168th Street near Liberty Ave, there appears to be subway grates.

[NewFlyer 230]

On Hillside Ave between Springfield Blvd & 231st the median is super wide because originally the Hillside Ave line was suppose to be extended from 179th street to I believe either Springfield Blvd or Little Neck Parkway. I wouldn’t have the  continue down Hillside but perhaps I would swap the  and ‘s terminal in Queens where the  goes to Jamaica Center and the  continues to Springfield Bl/ Hillside Ave. 
I wish the MTA and the State/City could explore the possibility of an extension under Hillside because then there would be no need to have a ton of routes covering the same route along Hillside. Also in regards to Nice Bus maybe the n1 could be extended to possibly Francis Lewis Blvd/ Hillside Ave or Springfield Blvd/ Hillside Ave all day and that could give that route a mini boost in ridership because I do believe having buses end suddenly at Hempstead Turnpike really effects the usefulness of the route when there are plenty of people who end up transferring to the n6 to Jamaica anyways. 

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

On 2/20/2023 at 7:02 PM, N6 Limited said:

On 168th Street near Liberty Ave, there appears to be subway grates.

Ah thank you. I did some digging on Google Maps and I found 3 unexplained sets of grates, as shown in the map below:

The most notable thing is all 3 of these grate sets are in the same style suggesting that whatever they belong to is all one larger thing. 

However, the main things that make me skeptical is the fact that these grates are still different than the subway grates that belong to the part of the Archer Av line in operation. If these greats did belong to some sort of subway infrastructure, there could be several reasons why they'd be different, but it certainly makes it less likely. I also tried doing a relatively sloppy google street view search for any NYC Subway manholes or other access points and didn't find anything, but again, this was a very sloppy search and there were several manholes that just weren't identifiable with Streetview.

One possible explanation is perhaps the MTA put the grates in to claim the ROW for 168th street when building the Archer Avenue Subway, even if they didn't actually build a tunnel or station underground. All 3 grates seem like possible entrance spots for a 168th Street station, plus, the grates are about a trains length apart (~600ft). Again, this is huge speculation, and there isn't anything to back it up, but just a theory that came to mind.

If anyone knows what these grates belong to (even if it isn't the NYC subway), I'd be quite curious.

[N6 Limited]

On 2/20/2023 at 7:02 PM, N6 Limited said:

On 168th Street near Liberty Ave, there appears to be subway grates.

 

53 minutes ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

Ah thank you. I did some digging on Google Maps and I found 3 unexplained sets of grates, as shown in the map below:

Sorry about that, I meant 160th Street and Liberty Ave.

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

52 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

 

Sorry about that, I meant 160th Street and Liberty Ave.

Oh bruh that tunnel already exists; if you look carefully on maps you'll also see subway grates behind what is now "The Church of God in Christ Jesus of Apostles' Faith Inc". The basically built the entire tunnel, just never the actual portal to connect the subway to take over the Branch of the LIRR to Laurelton. Today, this tunnel is used for layup trains. Today if the MTA wanted to it'd still be relatively easy for them to run  trains out to Laurelton just by adding the portal and converting the LIRR tracks; sad this is no longer talked about today.

The 63rd Street tunnel and Archer Avenue lines are smaller parts of a larger ambition that never happened; the Queens super express; had it been built, the 63rd Street tunnel would've connected to the LIRR tracks instead of Queens BLVD to create a new subway line via the LIRR ROW, the "Superexpress". This service then would've then gone via Archer Avenue, which was supposed to have 2 branches; the lower level (today ) was supposed to continue all the way out to Hollis Farmers Blvd 180st underground. The upper level (Today ) was supposed to take over the LIRR tracks to Laurelton.

Today, the MTA could still make the Queens super express a reality if they really wanted to, but tbh the current Queens Blvd config works well enough and this super express just doesn't offer enough of an advantage; the main goal was to increase capacity which 63rd Street tunnel successfully did. The extensions to Hollis and especially Laurelton still need to be investigated; they would both offer service to subway deserts, and as I said before, most of the infrastructure for the  to go to Laurelton is already there, they'd just need to convert the LIRR branch and add a station or two.

[zacster]

When I went to get my car back I exited the D train at Bay 50th and looked down the line and it really does look like it was meant to go straight.  And then on the street you can see the difference in the pillars and construction where the line curves off, which look to be from a different time.  And then at Coney Island station itself, the West End line is over Stillwell. 

So now my question is whether the line was built over Stillwell originally, or maybe dead-ended at Bay 50th for a while.  It is clearly different construction the way it goes now, if only by a few years.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

On 2/22/2023 at 5:46 PM, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

Oh bruh that tunnel already exists; if you look carefully on maps you'll also see subway grates behind what is now "The Church of God in Christ Jesus of Apostles' Faith Inc". The basically built the entire tunnel, just never the actual portal to connect the subway to take over the Branch of the LIRR to Laurelton. Today, this tunnel is used for layup trains. Today if the MTA wanted to it'd still be relatively easy for them to run  trains out to Laurelton just by adding the portal and converting the LIRR tracks; sad this is no longer talked about today.

The 63rd Street tunnel and Archer Avenue lines are smaller parts of a larger ambition that never happened; the Queens super express; had it been built, the 63rd Street tunnel would've connected to the LIRR tracks instead of Queens BLVD to create a new subway line via the LIRR ROW, the "Superexpress". This service then would've then gone via Archer Avenue, which was supposed to have 2 branches; the lower level (today ) was supposed to continue all the way out to Hollis Farmers Blvd 180st underground. The upper level (Today ) was supposed to take over the LIRR tracks to Laurelton.

Today, the MTA could still make the Queens super express a reality if they really wanted to, but tbh the current Queens Blvd config works well enough and this super express just doesn't offer enough of an advantage; the main goal was to increase capacity which 63rd Street tunnel successfully did. The extensions to Hollis and especially Laurelton still need to be investigated; they would both offer service to subway deserts, and as I said before, most of the infrastructure for the  to go to Laurelton is already there, they'd just need to convert the LIRR branch and add a station or two.

The decision to connect the 63rd Street Tunnel to the Queens Blvd Line didn’t really add capacity. It just basically moved some of the existing pre-2001 capacity (the ) to a different tunnel. Yes, there is now a fourth Queens-Manhattan service on QB (first the , now the ), but it’s a service relatively few people want to use and it has to merge with the other local service (the ) northbound and the  southbound. And you can only run so many  trains without truly impacting  service. There is the potential to run more service than is currently provided, but the current  service patterns with their many merges just don’t allow for it. 

[Lawrence St]

29 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

The decision to connect the 63rd Street Tunnel to the Queens Blvd Line didn’t really add capacity. It just basically moved some of the existing pre-2001 capacity (the ) to a different tunnel. Yes, there is now a fourth Queens-Manhattan service on QB (first the , now the ), but it’s a service relatively few people want to use and it has to merge with the other local service (the ) northbound and the  southbound. And you can only run so many  trains without truly impacting  service. There is the potential to run more service than is currently provided, but the current  service patterns with their many merges just don’t allow for it. 

If only there was some sort of terminal in Manhattan we can use to terminate additional  trains without delaying the …

oh wait.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

If only there was some sort of terminal in Manhattan we can use to terminate additional  trains without delaying the …

oh wait.

I suppose a limited number of  trains can turn at 2nd Ave. It would have to be a very limited amount to not delay the .

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

7 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

The decision to connect the 63rd Street Tunnel to the Queens Blvd Line didn’t really add capacity. It just basically moved some of the existing pre-2001 capacity (the ) to a different tunnel. Yes, there is now a fourth Queens-Manhattan service on QB (first the , now the ), but it’s a service relatively few people want to use and it has to merge with the other local service (the ) northbound and the  southbound. And you can only run so many  trains without truly impacting  service. There is the potential to run more service than is currently provided, but the current  service patterns with their many merges just don’t allow for it. 

In an absolute sense it did add capacity, though not quite a full line as you state. Before, QBLVD had basically 1.5 tunnels into the city (since 60th street is shared with Astoria), meaning no matter what, there was always going to be spare capacity on the QBLVD trunk for service into the city. Now, QBLVD can run at maximum capacity the terminals will allow. Imo this is another reason for the  extension; currently the expresses run at 30tph but if the  had a higher capacity terminal you could have 34-38tph (36tph is likely the practical max, but in theory you could have 40tph with CBTC).

[Lawrence St]

9 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

I suppose a limited number of  trains can turn at 2nd Ave. It would have to be a very limited amount to not delay the .

I’ve been proposed to have select 10-car  trains run between Forest Hills and 2nd Ave. Would balance out the ridership on QBL without delaying the  and  further.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

17 hours ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

In an absolute sense it did add capacity, though not quite a full line as you state. Before, QBLVD had basically 1.5 tunnels into the city (since 60th street is shared with Astoria), meaning no matter what, there was always going to be spare capacity on the QBLVD trunk for service into the city. Now, QBLVD can run at maximum capacity the terminals will allow. Imo this is another reason for the  extension; currently the expresses run at 30tph but if the  had a higher capacity terminal you could have 34-38tph (36tph is likely the practical max, but in theory you could have 40tph with CBTC).

The part about adding capacity in an absolute sense I agree with. Unfortunately, the current  service pattern prohibits them from taking advantage of said capacity, even with CBTC, due to the multiple merges in LIC (36th St, QP and the  /  merge). The 's terminal limitations at both ends, (WTC's tracks end within the station, limiting the speed at which trains can enter and leave) are already a constraint on that line's service. The  is constrained by Stillwell Ave due to a far away switch (like JC, but maybe worse because of the sharp curve trains must take upon entering/leaving Stillwell), but at least trains have multiple short turn options at 2nd Ave, Kings Highway, Church or 18th Ave. The  and ‘s capacity constraints are already well known and brought up many times here.

Edited March 1, 2023 by T to Dyre Avenue

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

6 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

The part about adding capacity in an absolute sense I agree with. Unfortunately, the current  service pattern prohibits them from taking advantage of said capacity, even with CBTC, due to the multiple merges in LIC (36th St, QP and the  /  merge). The 's terminal limitations at both ends, (WTC's tracks end within the station, limiting the speed at which trains can enter and leave) are already a constraint on that line's service. The  is constrained by Stillwell Ave due to a far away switch (like JC, but maybe worse because of the sharp curve trains must take upon entering/leaving Stillwell), but at least trains have multiple short turn options at 2nd Ave, Kings Highway, Church or 18th Ave. The  and ‘s capacity constraints are already well known and brought up many times here.

If SAS is ever fully built in some form, it should help supplement local capacity. Growth patterns along QBLVD generally seem to favor the local service cause growth is happening closer to Manhattan near the Long Island City area. This would also take a bit of a burden off the  allowing more service to Astoria.

The  sucks because there's not really any short-turn options, especially with 42nd Street lower level now unusable. From my understanding though, Jamacia Center is a bigger constraint than WTC because at Jamacia Center, the crossover switch isn't till you're almost at Stuphin Blvd; at the very least they should address trying to move that closer to Jamacia Center so you can terminate more than a measly 12tph. In an ideal world of maximizing service, I would have the  and , with the  being the  except it runs locals on the Culver line and terminates at Church Av (whereas the  runs express and goes all the way to Stillwell Av). Also, the  runs express past Forest Hills to 179 whereas the  becomes local past Forest Hills. 15tph on the  (all going to Jamacia Center), 10tph on the , and 10tph on  during rush. For all practical purposes, the  and  share the same fleet, and may be both internally identified as the  similar to the  and .

[T to Dyre Avenue]

16 hours ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

If SAS is ever fully built in some form, it should help supplement local capacity. Growth patterns along QBLVD generally seem to favor the local service cause growth is happening closer to Manhattan near the Long Island City area. This would also take a bit of a burden off the  allowing more service to Astoria.

The  sucks because there's not really any short-turn options, especially with 42nd Street lower level now unusable. From my understanding though, Jamacia Center is a bigger constraint than WTC because at Jamacia Center, the crossover switch isn't till you're almost at Stuphin Blvd; at the very least they should address trying to move that closer to Jamacia Center so you can terminate more than a measly 12tph. In an ideal world of maximizing service, I would have the  and , with the  being the  except it runs locals on the Culver line and terminates at Church Av (whereas the  runs express and goes all the way to Stillwell Av). Also, the  runs express past Forest Hills to 179 whereas the  becomes local past Forest Hills. 15tph on the  (all going to Jamacia Center), 10tph on the , and 10tph on  during rush. For all practical purposes, the  and  share the same fleet, and may be both internally identified as the  similar to the  and .

But then you'll have the  merging with the  past between 71st and 75th avenues. That will cause delays on both the  and  lines, especially given that you'll have 10 tph merging with 15 tph in that spot. That's why I've always felt it's best if QB locals turn at 71st Ave, regardless of which trains they are (the late night  is an exception, because late night service is only 3 tph).

A service pattern which has locals entering Manhattan via the 53rd St tunnel and expresses via 63rd with no service from Queens Blvd to the 60th St tunnel (except for emergency reroutes and non-revenue moves) would probably be the best way to run more trains on the QB Line - as well as on the Astoria Line - because there would be far fewer delays in LIC due to the previously mentioned three merges in that area.

Edited March 2, 2023 by T to Dyre Avenue

[Vulturious]

17 hours ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

If SAS is ever fully built in some form, it should help supplement local capacity. Growth patterns along QBLVD generally seem to favor the local service cause growth is happening closer to Manhattan near the Long Island City area. This would also take a bit of a burden off the  allowing more service to Astoria.

The  sucks because there's not really any short-turn options, especially with 42nd Street lower level now unusable. From my understanding though, Jamacia Center is a bigger constraint than WTC because at Jamacia Center, the crossover switch isn't till you're almost at Stuphin Blvd; at the very least they should address trying to move that closer to Jamacia Center so you can terminate more than a measly 12tph. In an ideal world of maximizing service, I would have the  and , with the  being the  except it runs locals on the Culver line and terminates at Church Av (whereas the  runs express and goes all the way to Stillwell Av). Also, the  runs express past Forest Hills to 179 whereas the  becomes local past Forest Hills. 15tph on the  (all going to Jamacia Center), 10tph on the , and 10tph on  during rush. For all practical purposes, the  and  share the same fleet, and may be both internally identified as the  similar to the  and .

FIrst thing, I'm going to point out since this is a bit of an itch is that the H's designation is already in use internally for the Rockaway Park . I believe someone also pointed this out to you the last time you mentioned the H's name as well, but you probably forgot. From now on, I'm going to call the  as the  since that is still available.

I'm not against the idea of running the  as the IND South Brooklyn (IND Culver for simplicity) local, however the  and the people that take it would like to say otherwise. I honestly doubt we'll get to a point the  is cut back from 6 Av any time soon. Even if you were to keep the line, the  would be in the way since the  is limited as is because of the  and it's limitations. 

There's also the issue of even if you were to increase the 's tph from Jamaica Center, WTC is still a problem. Then there's the addition of the  acting as the local  train, it's limiting the service. On one hand, it's only going to be dealing with two lines which is the  and . On the other however, now there's the issue of the  whether it's running around or not. The MTA now has to compensate the lack of an extra service along 53 St, one dumb idea would be to run the  with the  and stay express like you wanted along QBL to Forest Hills. But that doesn't really solve much of anything with the  so it's pretty much moot to even bother to begin with. 

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

4 hours ago, Vulturious said:

FIrst thing, I'm going to point out since this is a bit of an itch is that the H's designation is already in use internally for the Rockaway Park . I believe someone also pointed this out to you the last time you mentioned the H's name as well, but you probably forgot. From now on, I'm going to call the  as the  since that is still available.

I'm not against the idea of running the  as the IND South Brooklyn (IND Culver for simplicity) local, however the  and the people that take it would like to say otherwise. I honestly doubt we'll get to a point the  is cut back from 6 Av any time soon. Even if you were to keep the line, the  would be in the way since the  is limited as is because of the  and it's limitations. 

There's also the issue of even if you were to increase the 's tph from Jamaica Center, WTC is still a problem. Then there's the addition of the  acting as the local  train, it's limiting the service. On one hand, it's only going to be dealing with two lines which is the  and . On the other however, now there's the issue of the  whether it's running around or not. The MTA now has to compensate the lack of an extra service along 53 St, one dumb idea would be to run the  with the  and stay express like you wanted along QBL to Forest Hills. But that doesn't really solve much of anything with the  so it's pretty much moot to even bother to begin with. 

Fair point with the naming; I'd assume it'd be relatively easy to change the Rockaway Shuttle's internal identify if needed; from a raw nomenclature standpoint, the  likely becomes whatever the Rockaway Beach Branch thing if it ever ends up being built.  seems to be reserved for a 4th 8th Avenue service if that's ever needed again. After that you have to go to the 2nd half of the alphabet where  is the best precedent.

6th Av local should be able to handle about 28tph with CBTC, especially since the  and  have already merged long ago by the time the  joins; at no point is there a true 3-way merge which would constrain capacity. All the  does is allow  to utilize express tracks on it's outer ends; from a practical standpoint ig it's like running tph on the  in the Manhattan portion, though if that'd be impossible, you could reduce to 8tph for  and  each; the general concept is the same.

As for the , I understand that; 15tph is what it is currently scheduled to run, it's just that I'm sending all trains to Jamacia Center now that there's a crossover right before Jamacia Center in this hypothetical. Currently, some  trains have to go to 179st during rush which is less than ideal given Archer Avenue seems like the favored serviced. 

This is just a hypothetical idea, not necessarily a great one.

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

Think I might've actually found something:

This photo (and multiple others) suggests the IRT was constructing or already had something at Fourth Avenue and Butler Street back in 1915 as part of dual contract 3 for route 12 (which is basically the Eastern Parkway Line). What's odd is by this time, the BMT had been awarded the 4th Avenue line and was a significant way through construction on this segment. However, there was much fighting early on about who would ultimately get 4th Avenue and if one looks at this dual contract IRT plan map from 1910, one can see not only does it show the 4th Avenue Line as being IRT, it also shows it as being "under construction".

I have 3 theories:

1. The IRT started constructing the 4th Avenue line before the contract was officially awarded to the BMT, and BMT construction basically destroyed whatever IRT infrastructure that had been constructed.

2. The IRT constructed provisions for the 4th Avenue line alongside when the BMT building it's 4th Av subway. These provisions extended as far as Butler St, but have been sealed off and lost to time.

3. IRT started constructing the 4th Avenue line before the contract was awarded to BMT, but BMT preserved what IRT had constructed

Either way, I'd be really curious to know what business the IRT had taking photos at Butler St and 4th Avenue as late as 1915.