Jump to content

63rd Street Tunnel Shutdown Begins Last week in August.

RTOMan

By RTOMan,
in New York City Subway

 Share

Recommended Posts

ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ

ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ

Posted
Posted
On 10/2/2023 at 9:26 AM, slantfan4281 said:

Any chance that they swap the (F) and (M) long term as a result of this if they find the service pattern to work better? It would be great to not deal with the 36th St merge anymore. You can run the (M) to Forest Hills over the weekend and the (F) via 63rd overnight. If you don't want to run 2 locals on QBL over the weekend you can swap the (R) and (W) in Queens and maybe get the (R) to share equipment with the (N) kind of like the whole (2) / (5) situation. You'd also have one less conflict impacting (E) service.

I've heard some speculate this is the case because all the sign/wayfinding replacements on the 53rd St (E)(F) seem permanent. MTA usually uses white signs for temporary changes and black signs for long term, plus they went out of their way to outright replace the (M) bullet with (F) rather than just covering it up.

The big question would be who would serve 63rd St weekends and nights? Would the (F) switch to 63rd during these hours (might be confusing), or does the (M) run 24/7? If so, does the MTA swap the (R) and (W) in Queens? Then what yard would the (R) fleet come from?

0
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 468
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Chris89292

Chris89292

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

I've heard some speculate this is the case because all the sign/wayfinding replacements on the 53rd St (E)(F) seem permanent. MTA usually uses white signs for temporary changes and black signs for long term, plus they went out of their way to outright replace the (M) bullet with (F) rather than just covering it up.

 

It’s not a permanent sign, it’s a black sticker with the (F) covering the (M) behind it, which makes it look like a newly made sign but it isn’t

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
slantfan4281

slantfan4281

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

I've heard some speculate this is the case because all the sign/wayfinding replacements on the 53rd St (E)(F) seem permanent. MTA usually uses white signs for temporary changes and black signs for long term, plus they went out of their way to outright replace the (M) bullet with (F) rather than just covering it up.

The big question would be who would serve 63rd St weekends and nights? Would the (F) switch to 63rd during these hours (might be confusing), or does the (M) run 24/7? If so, does the MTA swap the (R) and (W) in Queens? Then what yard would the (R) fleet come from?

I would run the (M) to 71st over the weekend with the (F) via 63rd overnight, and swap the (R) and (W) in Queens. The (R) would share a fleet with the (N).

0
Link to comment
Share on other sites
slantfan4281

slantfan4281

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Comrade96 said:

both

I get that it would cost the MTA extra, but it's not out of left field. The current switch and merge setup with the waits at Queens Plaza and 36th suck, and separating the (E) and (M) would help with capacity and spread some of the 53rd St crowds onto the (F). IIRC the MTA was planning to run a trial of this 3-4 years ago but never went through with it for some reason. The (R) could also use a shorter runtime and fewer merges.

0
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Comrade96

Comrade96

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, slantfan4281 said:

I get that it would cost the MTA extra, but it's not out of left field. The current switch and merge setup with the waits at Queens Plaza and 36th suck, and separating the (E) and (M) would help with capacity and spread some of the 53rd St crowds onto the (F). IIRC the MTA was planning to run a trial of this 3-4 years ago but never went through with it for some reason. The (R) could also use a shorter runtime and fewer merges.

the (N) and (R) are based out of different yards, they can't share fleets

 

You would also need to make the (M) a full time route, and thats something they arent willing to do

0
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Robert Spire

Robert Spire

Posted
Posted
On 10/6/2023 at 2:03 PM, CyclonicTrainLookout said:

To be fair, the are only two ways to access Manhattan from Roosevelt Island, and neither is by road. I guess the MTA would rather prolong the 63rd Street construction just to give the island people direct access to Manhattan and the subway there.

There is a vehicular bridge to Roosevelt Island. 

0
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TDL

TDL

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Comrade96 said:

the (N) and (R) are based out of different yards, they can't share fleets

 

You would also need to make the (M) a full time route, and thats something they arent willing to do

Well they can base the (N)and (R)out of CIY then. Have the (W) run out of Jamaica Yard. Since the (R) has more trainsets than the (W) you could also displace the (B) to Concourse.

 

(M) doesn't have to be fulltime. Nights service remains as is ((F) local via. 63rd). Weekends, (F) express via. 53rd, (W) local the same current run times as the (R). If QBL Local needs additional trains send the (E) local.

3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
R32 3838

R32 3838

Posted
Posted

If they were to swap the (F) and (M) permanently  , The (M) can run to 21st queens bridge on nights and weekends giving (M) riders 24/7 access to midtown which is needed. The (M) to Essex is a waste and when the (M) was running on 6th ave on weekends to 96th st, The ridership was high so the demand is there.

 

You don't need thru service from queens blvd and 63rd st during the late nights and weekends and they can at least give a free out of system transfer between queens plaza and Queensbridge or take the Q66 and Q69 buses to queen bridge. Then once the GOs and everything is done on queens blvd then they can bring the (M) to forest hills.

 

All they have to do is fix the issues with dwell times and other issues and the (E) and (F) can run via 53rd without issue. They use the same equipment so it's not like in the 90s where the (F) had nothing but R46s and the (E) was all R32s which created dwell time due to the R46s having 32 doors vs 40 on an R32.

 

CBTC on paper is supposed to fix these issues but we all know that isn't the case at this moment.

 

 

0
Link to comment
Share on other sites
slantfan4281

slantfan4281

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Comrade96 said:

the (N) and (R) are based out of different yards, they can't share fleets

 

You would also need to make the (M) a full time route, and thats something they arent willing to do

Couldn't you move the (R) to CI and the (W) to Jamaica? You could free up some space at the latter since the (W) is part time and less frequent?

Perhaps with the congestion pricing $ the MTA could spend more on the (M)? 

This Twitter thread is a good analysis of how the (F)(M) swap could work: 

 

0
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CenSin

CenSin

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, slantfan4281 said:

Couldn't you move the (R) to CI and the (W) to Jamaica? You could free up some space at the latter since the (W) is part time and less frequent?

Just got back home on the (N) to Coney Island. PM rush is atrocious because of all the (R)s carrying air to the yard. They hold (N) trains at 86 Street and those (N) trains hold other (N) trains at Avenue U and so on.

It’s ridiculous how long such a movement takes. That (R) rushed past at 18 Avenue. We caught up with it at 86 Street. Somehow it bypassed us 8 minutes ago, but was idling at 86 Street, and then blocked us for another 5 minutes to crawl into the yard.

More out-of-service trains clogging up revenue tracks for yard access? lol no.

0
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ

ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, slantfan4281 said:

Couldn't you move the (R) to CI and the (W) to Jamaica? You could free up some space at the latter since the (W) is part time and less frequent?

Perhaps with the congestion pricing $ the MTA could spend more on the (M)? 

This Twitter thread is a good analysis of how the (F)(M) swap could work: 

 

Thanks for sharing thread. Knew Queens plaza was a mess but this lays it out more directly for me.

Until p recently, I was someone in favor of keeping the current/previous QBLVD service config. My main concern was that you'd need a local to serve 63rd St tunnel late nights and weekends which the MTA wouldn't want to do unless they cut weekend (R) (or (W)) service to Forest Hills, in which case QBLVD riders lose direct access to Broadway.

In reality though, Broadway runs pretty close to 6th Av for the most part anyways, and it's pretty easy to transfer at Lex-63rd or 34th St Herald Sq for a Broadway train if you really need it. The only legitimate argument against (M) via 63rd is that on weekends, the (M) would presumably run instead of the (R)/(W), so local riders between Queens Plaza and Jackson Heights would have to backtrack to Jackson Heights if they want an 8th Av (E); unfortunately in Manhattan there would be no direct connection between (E) and 63rd (M) until West 4th St.

I feel like a lot of the argument for holding off the (F) to 63rd is just an identity thing; or as the thread said MTA wanted (F) because it would lead to higher ridership on 63rd St line.

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Comrade96

Comrade96

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, TDL said:

Well they can base the (N)and (R)out of CIY then. Have the (W) run out of Jamaica Yard. Since the (R) has more trainsets than the (W) you could also displace the (B) to Concourse.

 

(M) doesn't have to be fulltime. Nights service remains as is ((F) local via. 63rd). Weekends, (F) express via. 53rd, (W) local the same current run times as the (R). If QBL Local needs additional trains send the (E) local.

you buffs are on another level, none of that is ever going to happen lmfao

can't split the W from the N for all intents and purposes they are the same train

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
slantfan4281

slantfan4281

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, RTOMan said:

After reading these last few replies..

Im glad that NONE of  those posting those replies will have anything to do with train movement for the foreseeable future...

Geez my goodness...

The current setup with 36th is awful... (can't count how many times I've been on a stopped and crawling (F) towards Jamaica after Queensbridge...)

Is it really that much of a hassle to even swap the two on weekdays and then just run the (F) via 63rd weekends and overnight? You can run some short turn (M) to 2nd Av to make up for the service loss on 63rd, but won't have to run the full (M) other times...

With CBTC I just find it crazy that the MTA is willing to let such a major bottleneck stay in place... hell, they seem somewhat willing to reconfigure service through Rogers a little with new switches in the 20 year assessment, even though that would take much more work, cost more, and force more transfers... 

0
Link to comment
Share on other sites
slantfan4281

slantfan4281

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, slantfan4281 said:

The current setup with 36th is awful... (can't count how many times I've been on a stopped and crawling (F) towards Jamaica after Queensbridge...)

Is it really that much of a hassle to even swap the two on weekdays and then just run the (F) via 63rd weekends and overnight? You can run some short turn (M) to 2nd Av to make up for the service loss on 63rd, but won't have to run the full (M) other times...

With CBTC I just find it crazy that the MTA is willing to let such a major bottleneck stay in place... hell, they seem somewhat willing to reconfigure service through Rogers a little with new switches in the 20 year assessment, even though that would take much more work, cost more, and force more transfers... 

I now get that you can't mess with Broadway or the yards, and that running the full (M) over the weekend is a nonstarter, but is doing a weekday only swap out of the question as well? 

0
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lex

Lex

Posted
Posted
39 minutes ago, slantfan4281 said:

I now get that you can't mess with Broadway or the yards, and that running the full (M) over the weekend is a nonstarter, but is doing a weekday only swap out of the question as well? 

Great, so everyone has to remember which branch the (F) will serve at what time. That won't cause any problems.

0
Link to comment
Share on other sites
slantfan4281

slantfan4281

Posted
Posted
56 minutes ago, Lex said:

Great, so everyone has to remember which branch the (F) will serve at what time. That won't cause any problems.

It's not difficult to remember like it's some midday/evening after PM rush swap. Weekends and overnight via 63rd, all other times via 53rd. Commuters aren't idiots and will figure it out. Regardless you'll have service to 6th Av one way and QBL the other. They didn't have any issues sending the (R) via the bridge over the weekend back when they were renovating Montague.

Will it involve change and adjustments, something the MTA is allergic to? Yes. But you can fix a backup on one of the busiest trunk lines. Just because it makes things slightly more annoying for operations doesn't mean it won't greatly benefit commuters with fewer delays. 

Just look at the overcrowding at Roosevelt that lead to that person falling onto the tracks the other day. 53rd is much busier than 63rd, and right now the (E) is overcrowded, the (F) is slightly less so, and (M) carries air. If we ran twice as many express trains through 53rd you could relieve some congestion on the (E) and crowding at Roosevelt from people passing up (F) and (M) for the (E). When the (V) was around it carried air despite the MTA's attempts at sending it 53rd to relieve the (E), and they're still doing the same thing today. 

0
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lawrence St

Lawrence St

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, CenSin said:

Just got back home on the (N) to Coney Island. PM rush is atrocious because of all the (R)s carrying air to the yard. They hold (N) trains at 86 Street and those (N) trains hold other (N) trains at Avenue U and so on.

It’s ridiculous how long such a movement takes. That (R) rushed past at 18 Avenue. We caught up with it at 86 Street. Somehow it bypassed us 8 minutes ago, but was idling at 86 Street, and then blocked us for another 5 minutes to crawl into the yard.

More out-of-service trains clogging up revenue tracks for yard access? lol no.

I never understood why those (R) put-in’s don’t run in service instead of clogging up the road.

0
Link to comment
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.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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

  I accept