Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[bobtehpanda]

If you have a Wordpress blog, they also do media hosting.

 

Here is a proposal for extending the "core" SAS system.

 

 

 

[Wallyhorse]

Excellent stuff!!  Well thought out!

 

If you have a Wordpress blog, they also do media hosting.

 

Here is a proposal for extending the "core" SAS system.

 

[CenSin]

If you have a Wordpress blog, they also do media hosting.

 

Here is a proposal for extending the "core" SAS system.

 

 

 

Nice graphics.

 

But how are the (express tracks) going to be extended down Utica Avenue? The local tracks are in the way and block any southward extension of the express tracks. The express tracks were engineered to continue east.

[bobtehpanda]

Nice graphics.

 

But how are the (express tracks) going to be extended down Utica Avenue? The local tracks are in the way and block any southward extension of the express tracks. The express tracks were engineered to continue east.

 

I'm assuming it's possible; the 4 down Utica has been a plan since at least the '60s and the time of the IRT, so it must have been not difficult. You could probably just extend the tracks east, dive around and turn them south, using E NY Av to get back to Utica..

Edited July 30, 2015 by bobtehpanda

[Trainmaster5]

I'm assuming it's possible; the 4 down Utica has been a plan since at least the '60s and the time of the IRT, so it must have been not difficult. You could probably just extend the tracks east, dive around and turn them south, using E NY Av to get back to Utica..

As constructed the bellmouths would connect to the local tracks in both directions. Basically it's the same setup as the Nostrand Avenue line connection. Many years ago there was a diamond crossover located at the north end of Utica Avenue on the s/b tracks which could allow an express train to arrive on the local track.. It may look like it's possible to swing a train southbound down Utica from the express track once past the station it's physically impossible today.. The n/b  trains from New Lots and the relay trains block any possible turn toward the south from the express track. Picture the existing layout south of Utica Avenue toward Sutter-Rutland. That curve to the right the s/b makes brings the train upward at East New York Avenue and Portal St. From the Utica Ave station s/b on the street you have one solid block of residential buildings (to Rochester) followed by the Lincoln Terrace Park footprint to Buffalo Avenue. Meanwhile there's the ramp the n/b relay trains use next to the s/b local track.. That blocks any construction from the express track toward the south. BTW here's a tidbit for you historians and subway fans. The relay track that doesn't curve toward New Lots ends at Pitkin Avenue and Eastern Parkway. That was the original end of Eastern Parkway, not the current day turn toward Atlantic Avenue. The addresses on Pitkin Avenue are a continuation of those on Eastern Parkway. The reason the IRT didn't continue the Eastern Parkway line eastward along Pitkin was because the BRT Fulton elevated was at the other end of the street. Carry on.

[78 via Stew Leonards]

extend the further northeast into Whitestone

extend the towards Floral Park

[MysteriousBtrain]

extend the further northeast into Whitestone

extend the towards Floral Park

Impossible with the current configuration at Main Street.

[S78 via Hylan]

And the is already long as it is.

[CenSin]

And the is already long as it is.

Not if it runs express. The main delays come from dwelling at stations. The and/or can take on the local stops up to 179 Street.

[Union Tpke]

Impossible with the current configuration at Main Street.

Have trains branch off at Willets Point.

[TheNewYorkElevated]

And the is already long as it is.

It looks pretty possible with the the tracks at 188th Street. Maybe expand late-night service to Forest Hills to help out. Adding that, make the run express in Brooklyn for that matter during late-nights. Manhattan included.

[RollOver]

Not if it runs express. The main delays come from dwelling at stations. The and/or can take on the local stops up to 179 Street.

 

What do you mean, CenSin? You would still have the same delays regardless - the fumigation and relaying of trains at Church Avenue, as well as that X diamond switch being located midway between West 8th Street and Stillwell Avenue. Hate it so much. The never runs on time anyway.

Edited July 31, 2015 by RollOver

[Wallyhorse]

What do you mean, CenSin? You would still have the same delays regardless - the fumigation and relaying of trains at Church Avenue, as well as that X diamond switch being located midway between West 8th Street and Stillwell Avenue. Hate it so much. The never runs on time anyway.

I think CenSin meant on Queens Boulevard.

[RollOver]

I think CenSin meant on Queens Boulevard.

But he said "main delays come from dwelling at stations".

Edited August 1, 2015 by RollOver

[CenSin]

But he said "main delays come from dwelling at stations".

Exactly. And by taking a few more local stops away, that's less dwelling. If you combine the effect of exposing trains to more stations and more crowds, and the delays at Church Avenue and Coney Island, then that’s worse than only the delays at Church Avenue and Coney Island, no?

[RollOver]

Exactly. And by taking a few more local stops away, that's less dwelling. If you combine the effect of exposing trains to more stations and more crowds, and the delays at Church Avenue and Coney Island, then that’s worse than only the delays at Church Avenue and Coney Island, no?

 

You sure as hell got that right "no". You are completely wrong, my friend...the runs very frequently (12-15 tph at rush hour and 9 tph midday/evening). The issue is Church Avenue and Coney Island. It takes 5 minutes for a train to fumigated at Church Avenue. At the same time, there can be two other trains at the relay. And since the diamond X switch is located in the middle between West 8th and Stillwell, an arriving train coming into West 8th has to wait until one of the two other trains leave Stillwell and clear the switch. So the is delayed at most 5 minutes twice (one at Church and again at West 8th). So that's an additional 10 minute wait or so for an train coming into Stillwell give or take. So don't make that up. The is even more late if the other 3 lines (that it interacts with along its run) is late too.

 

So I guess the is always delayed because of all the stops it makes like the and ? That makes no sense. The I can understand, because of the , and (if those three other lines are running behind schedule). You yourself even said so a couple of pages back - the bottlenecks at Queens Plaza, the 60th Street Tube and Prince Street. But the and ? No. They don't interact with any other lines along their runs and they run very frequently. Your chances of delays on those two IRT lines are minimum at best, unless the terminals can't handle all that high number of trains. I don't know why you like "express" trains so much anyway...there's nothing wrong with the staying local east of 71st Avenue. If the line gets extended further east beyond 179th Street, chances are you would relieve crowding and delays on the local buses in the area. Plus, anybody going to Manhattan or from Manhattan would no longer have to rely on the local buses that would give them a good half-hour or so commute before arriving home or at the subway to take an express train to Manhattan. That's what I call more important than your "express". So what difference do you think running it express to Hillside is gonna change? Nothing.

 

And lastly, since you mention the train, I hope you know that the only reason why it suffers from so-called "overcrowding" is because it has both riders traveling within stops as well as it own riders traveling to Flatbush or more importantly, lower/upper WPR. They always have the and coming evenly apart or the coming right before the does, which is unacceptable.

 

Never mind...it's your own proposal for the subway system anyway. What do I care?

Edited August 1, 2015 by RollOver

[bobtehpanda]

What do you mean, CenSin? You would still have the same delays regardless - the fumigation and relaying of trains at Church Avenue, as well as that X diamond switch being located midway between West 8th Street and Stillwell Avenue. Hate it so much. The never runs on time anyway.

 

Turning local trains doesn't affect expresses at Forest Hills, which has a similar configuration, so there is no reason it should also affect trains at 179.

 

That being said, the community has made it very clear that they will not stand for a full-length QBL local from 179. Most likely, extension of the would be precluded until a Queens Blvd Bypass were built connecting the local tracks at 75 Av to the 63 St tunnel.

[CDTA]

Instead of wasting a ton of money on giving the it's own line in Downtown Manhattan, only for it to end there, why not route it through the only 4 tracked line in the system to run 10TPH? 

I propose running the through the Nassau Street Line from Bowery to Broad Street, and then continuing through Montague and the 4th Ave Local (The doesn't share tracks through Dekalb, and only runs on 10TPH, so it can work) up to 4th Ave-9th Sts, where it will continue to 15th Street, where it will branch off in time to clear Prospect Avenue Station, and run under Prospect Parkway to a new station between 5th and 6th Avenues, where the train will terminate, without interfering with other trains. Since it's being built on a city owned ROW, tail tracks could easily be added.
This would require a reconfiguration of the Nassau Line tracks (shown here (with a street overlay of the Bowery-Chrystie connection here)) and ideally an extension of the platforms, but is not required. The separate station at Prospect could also be cut, but that would require running the trains to Bay Ridge, which seems like vastly overserving it unless you cut all ®'s to Whitehall. This would also mean being forced to use 60ft'ers on the , but it seems like a small price to pay for getting the to Brooklyn while still saving money over the original plan.

[Wallyhorse]

Instead of wasting a ton of money on giving the it's own line in Downtown Manhattan, only for it to end there, why not route it through the only 4 tracked line in the system to run 10TPH? 

I propose running the through the Nassau Street Line from Bowery to Broad Street, and then continuing through Montague and the 4th Ave Local (The doesn't share tracks through Dekalb, and only runs on 10TPH, so it can work) up to 4th Ave-9th Sts, where it will continue to 15th Street, where it will branch off in time to clear Prospect Avenue Station, and run under Prospect Parkway to a new station between 5th and 6th Avenues, where the train will terminate, without interfering with other trains. Since it's being built on a city owned ROW, tail tracks could easily be added.

This would require a reconfiguration of the Nassau Line tracks (shown here (with a street overlay of the Bowery-Chrystie connection here)) and ideally an extension of the platforms, but is not required. The separate station at Prospect could also be cut, but that would require running the trains to Bay Ridge, which seems like vastly overserving it unless you cut all ®'s to Whitehall. This would also mean being forced to use 60ft'ers on the , but it seems like a small price to pay for getting the to Brooklyn while still saving money over the original plan.

I have suggested something similar in the past EXCEPT in my view, the would go straight to Canal Street without stopping at The Bowery (joining the Nassau Line west/south of The Bowery) and then going a similar route, but perhaps after 36th Street going with the via West End to the old terminal of Bay Parkway.  As long as DeKalb can handle such, it can work and take major pressure off the between Atlantic Avenue and 125th Street.

 

Main requirement would be all stations on Nassau used by the SAS would have to be lengthened to accommodate 10-car trains (and as noted elsewhere, fixing the connection to the Nassau line from Montauge), but that would only require most stations in Manhattan to be lengthened by 65-66 feet or so since such stations used to handle eight 67-foot car trains in the past (534 feet) and likely can handle (albeit a tight fit) nine-car trains of 540 feet as it is.  

 

That said, I still like better the idea of the getting to Brooklyn via a new Schermerhorn Street tunnel that would connect the to the Fulton Street line via the existing Court Street (Transit Museum) station that would be re-activated for such and the as-current mostly unused tracks at Hoyt-Schemerhorn that would allow the to become the Fulton Street local and the and to BOTH run express on Fulton, with the running to Euclid (extended to Lefferts late nights), the to Lefferts (except late nights) and the to Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park with some service short-turning at Howard Beach-JFK.

[bobtehpanda]

Instead of wasting a ton of money on giving the it's own line in Downtown Manhattan, only for it to end there, why not route it through the only 4 tracked line in the system to run 10TPH? 

I propose running the through the Nassau Street Line from Bowery to Broad Street, and then continuing through Montague and the 4th Ave Local (The doesn't share tracks through Dekalb, and only runs on 10TPH, so it can work) up to 4th Ave-9th Sts, where it will continue to 15th Street, where it will branch off in time to clear Prospect Avenue Station, and run under Prospect Parkway to a new station between 5th and 6th Avenues, where the train will terminate, without interfering with other trains. Since it's being built on a city owned ROW, tail tracks could easily be added.

This would require a reconfiguration of the Nassau Line tracks (shown here (with a street overlay of the Bowery-Chrystie connection here)) and ideally an extension of the platforms, but is not required. The separate station at Prospect could also be cut, but that would require running the trains to Bay Ridge, which seems like vastly overserving it unless you cut all ®'s to Whitehall. This would also mean being forced to use 60ft'ers on the , but it seems like a small price to pay for getting the to Brooklyn while still saving money over the original plan.

 

Because long term you're hitching the Second Avenue horse to the ®'s frequency. If you want another service to go to Brooklyn from the SAS you eventually do have to build Phase IV.

 

Phase IV is also closer to most unserved office employment downtown than Nassau St is. Think about why Broad St has poor ridership numbers in the first place.

[RollOver]

Just a note about my New York City Subway rolling stock history change:

 

When it's nearly time for the entire Flushing Line to be fully automated with CBTC and ATO, I'll consider doing the / swap. Good thing the entire R62 and R62A fleets are both in 5-car sets in my NYCS rolling stock history change.

 

In reality, however, I've read up somewhere in this forum (can't recall the exact thread) about 3 years ago (when I joined this site) that the NTTs couldn't go onto the because Corona Facility wasn't able to maintain NTTs and Corona Facility wasn't upgraded at the time either. And yes, it was also because the is 11-cars (in reality), which is the #1 reason why there were sent to Jerome and Westchester over Corona.

 

http://New York City Subway services (RollOverTheFloor)

 

Give the above link a read if you guys want. Everything is virtually the same. I plan on doing some changes to that article sooner or later. Also, keep in mind that I've lowered the 's off-peak frequencies from 9 tph to 6 tph, primarily because of the R32s on the line.

[Wallyhorse]

Because long term you're hitching the Second Avenue horse to the ®'s frequency. If you want another service to go to Brooklyn from the SAS you eventually do have to build Phase IV.

 

Phase IV is also closer to most unserved office employment downtown than Nassau St is. Think about why Broad St has poor ridership numbers in the first place.

That's why I like the idea better of having the get to Brooklyn via a new tunnel on Schermerhorn Street that uses the existing Court Street station (with the TM moved elsewhere) and then joins the Fulton Street line at Hoyt-Schemerhorn.  This eliminates the and merge/un-merge east of Hoyt-Schermerhorn since the would use the as-current unused platform at Hoyt-Schermerhorn with the and opening on both sides there. 

[CDTA]

Because long term you're hitching the Second Avenue horse to the ®'s frequency. If you want another service to go to Brooklyn from the SAS you eventually do have to build Phase IV.

 

Phase IV is also closer to most unserved office employment downtown than Nassau St is. Think about why Broad St has poor ridership numbers in the first place.

Yes, however, keep in mind, the is already capped by the , , (soon to be or whatever you want to call it) and the , so if the needs to up it's capacity, it has other issues. Having said that, any extra trains coming from Queens can be turned at Whitehall, and any extra trains needed in Brooklyn can be run as (T)'s instead. If it ever does become too much however, we can simply end the at Broad Street, which while taking out service to Brooklyn, still saved A LOT of money in construction costs.

 

In response to the second comment, I disagree in that it's Broad Street's location that makes it perform poorly. I believe it's due to the fact that the average person wants midtown, where the doesn't go. Lower Manhattan isn't a destination if you don't work there. I'd also like to add, that we're talking a five, ten minute walk at most to the Nassau Street line from Water Street, so with the exception of perhaps Worth Street, they're not missing out on much.

[trainfanrod]

Yes, however, keep in mind, the is already capped by the , , (soon to be or whatever you want to call it) and the , so if the needs to up it's capacity, it has other issues. Having said that, any extra trains coming from Queens can be turned at Whitehall, and any extra trains needed in Brooklyn can be run as (T)'s instead. If it ever does become too much however, we can simply end the at Broad Street, which while taking out service to Brooklyn, still saved A LOT of money in construction costs.

 

In response to the second comment, I disagree in that it's Broad Street's location that makes it perform poorly. I believe it's due to the fact that the average person wants midtown, where the doesn't go. Lower Manhattan isn't a destination if you don't work there. I'd also like to add, that we're talking a five, ten minute walk at most to the Nassau Street line from Water Street, so with the exception of perhaps Worth Street, they're not missing out on much.

i said this millions of times the thing i would try to build tracks from dekalb to fulton st line and it goes into lafayette then to euclid to end

[2Line1291]

Why not consider both? Build Phase IV entirely and connect Second Ave Line to the Nassau St Line and have one service go down Water St and the other down Nassau St