|
|
| Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas (557678) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
|
| (557678) | |
Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Tue Jan 22 12:40:17 2008 How about:(A) 207 - Leffertses and Rockaways (C) 168 - WTC (E) Jamaica - 8 Av Exp - Euclid (S) extended from Broad Channel to the Transit Museum for the hell of it (B) full time 205/BPB (Concourse/CPW Local) - CI via Brighton Local (D) part time 205 (Concourse/CPW Express) - Bay Pkwy via West End (F) full time Continental local via 53 - CI via Culver (V) full time 179 express via 63 - Metropolitan (J) full time Jamaica to CI via West End (Z) skip-stop peak variant (N) full time 57/7 - Manny B - CI via Sea Beach (Q) part time Astoria - Manny B - Brighton Express (R) full time Astoria - 95 St (W) part time Continental - Whitehall (S) random peak trains extended via CI and the Sea Beach super-express to Chambers St, via new switches on the Manny B South Side; in the pm peak, these trains will carry a diamond-Z bullet to confuse everyone waiting for the Jamaica skip-stop. I think that messes everything up nicely. |
|
|
| (557680) | |
Re: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Tue Jan 22 12:43:44 2008, in response to Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas, posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Tue Jan 22 12:40:17 2008. Oh, and I forgot to mention the most beautiful part of this plan: Z trains would reverse at Bay Parkway to make D trains and vice versa! Half the side signs would be set for each route, so there's at least a 50/50 chance of passengers ending up where they want to go. |
|
|
| (557681) | |
Re: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Tue Jan 22 12:45:09 2008, in response to Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas, posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Tue Jan 22 12:40:17 2008. How about:(A) 207 - Leffertses and Rockaways (C) 168 - WTC (E) Jamaica - 8 Av Exp - Euclid (S) extended from Broad Channel to the Transit Museum for the hell of it (B) full time 205/BPB (Concourse/CPW Local) - CI via Brighton Local (D) part time 205 (Concourse/CPW Express) - Bay Pkwy via West End (F) full time Continental local via 53 - CI via Culver (V) full time 179 express via 63 - Metropolitan (J) full time Jamaica to CI via West End (Z) skip-stop peak variant (N) full time 57/7 - Manny B - CI via Sea Beach (Q) part time Astoria - Manny B - Brighton Express under protest (R) full time Astoria - 95 St if the train cars don't call in sick (W) part time Continental - Whitehall and files a union protest because it wants full-time work (S) random peak trains extended via CI and the Sea Beach super-express to Chambers St, via new switches on the Manny B South Side; in the pm peak, these trains will roll dice before every trip to see which of 5 different random bullets the train will display I think that messes everything up nicely. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (557683) | |
Re: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas |
|
|
Posted by Alargule on Tue Jan 22 13:01:14 2008, in response to Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas, posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Tue Jan 22 12:40:17 2008. Great!So...where can I get a shot of caffeine to go? |
|
|
| (557708) | |
Re: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Tue Jan 22 14:08:26 2008, in response to Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas, posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Tue Jan 22 12:40:17 2008. With all the GO's and stuff going on, I'm almost certain the TA would love to have the museum back. Even without opening the station for service, it's still a great place to relay trains. |
|
|
| (557723) | |
Re: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Tue Jan 22 14:41:37 2008, in response to Re: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas, posted by LuchAAA on Tue Jan 22 14:08:26 2008. "the TA would love to have the museum back."And front, too. |
|
|
| (557726) | |
Re: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jan 22 14:51:58 2008, in response to Re: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas, posted by LuchAAA on Tue Jan 22 14:08:26 2008. WHY????There *are* no trains that can relay there unless you are going to make a LOCAL that does not go to Manhattan at all. (GG) cannot go in there. Tracks do not permit it. ROAR |
|
|
| (557727) | |
(R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Tue Jan 22 14:54:06 2008, in response to Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas, posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Tue Jan 22 12:40:17 2008. View Larger Map |
|
|
| (557728) | |
Re: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Tue Jan 22 15:04:07 2008, in response to Re: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas, posted by LuchAAA on Tue Jan 22 14:08:26 2008. I'm almost certain the TA would love to have the museum backPerhaps they can move the museum to 76th Street. |
|
|
| (557730) | |
Re: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Tue Jan 22 15:04:38 2008, in response to Re: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jan 22 14:51:58 2008. Split service for a GO should be able to relay in there. |
|
|
| (557731) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by R42 4787 on Tue Jan 22 15:04:51 2008, in response to (R) Extension Idea, posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Tue Jan 22 14:54:06 2008. I don't think the Verrazano lower level will be equipped to handle rail service. At least you have the S53/79. |
|
|
| (557741) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Tue Jan 22 15:34:42 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea, posted by R42 4787 on Tue Jan 22 15:04:51 2008. I know that, that's why the line wasn't following the bridge. I was thinking a new tunnel altogether.The S53 and S79 fail... During rush hours it takes 20-30 minutes to get down from 86th/4th to 92nd/BQE and then another 30 minutes to cross the Verrazono. That Staten Island part of the routes are ok, it's just the entire bridge and Brooklyn part that screws the routes up. The (R) line extension could be done in phases if anything. The tunnel from 95th to Ft. Wadsworth would be finished first and then continue from there. This would be a more realistic approach than my rather absurd idea of building a 5-mile long (1) train tunnel or what seems to be a failing attempt to get NJT, the Port Authority and the MTA to work together on a West Shore Light Rail Line to Bayonne. |
|
|
| (557743) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea (was: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas) |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Tue Jan 22 15:50:14 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea, posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Tue Jan 22 15:34:42 2008. If you're going to do a tunnel you're not going to want to build around the VZ's anchorages and piers. A better route would be to pass a bit to the north of the bridge and intercept the SIR ROW around Tompkins Ave or a bit west of there. I don't know if you intend to rebuild the SI Expressway HOV lanes for heavy rail, but there should be sufficient room to create a junction between the SIR and R train there. That provides the maximum amount of route flexibility, allowing trains to run from Tottenville, Arlington, or perhaps even St George through the tunnel to NY.Unfortunately it seems while NJT would probably be happy to provide an HBLRT branch to NY provided NY paid for it aligning the three agencies would take an almost herculean effort on the part of SI's elected officials. Chances are considering that the Island accounts for a vast minority of NYC's residents and Bloomberg's relative indifference to those residents (at least compared to Giuliani's pandering) a very large, expensive project like a Narrows Tunnel are unlikely to happen anytime in the next 20 years. It may be worthwhile for SI's elected officials to look into getting the MTA to build them LRT which just happens to be compatible with HBLRT and then use that as leverage to bring the Port Authority and NJT into line. |
|
|
| (557745) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by error46146 on Tue Jan 22 15:50:53 2008, in response to (R) Extension Idea, posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Tue Jan 22 14:54:06 2008. Why does everyone want to extend the R to staten island??? that would be horrible, ridiculous, and disgusting! The R is already bad enough the way it is because it is so long and slow and there are so little trains. Making it longer would only make it worse |
|
|
| (557746) | |
Re: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas |
|
|
Posted by error46146 on Tue Jan 22 15:51:49 2008, in response to Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas, posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Tue Jan 22 12:40:17 2008. Yes, that does mess up everything nicely. |
|
|
| (557747) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Tue Jan 22 15:54:35 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea, posted by error46146 on Tue Jan 22 15:50:53 2008. But at least you wont have to transfer to a bus to go to S.I. And most likely they will add more trains to the (R) if it was extended. |
|
|
| (557748) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Tue Jan 22 16:01:08 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea, posted by error46146 on Tue Jan 22 15:50:53 2008. No, there would be trains added to the R to supplement the existing schedule thereby keeping scheduled headways constant. If the MTA could build decent sized yards in Arlington and near Tottenville, and get some use out of Clifton Shops they could pull the R out of Jamaica and run it to 57th (or 96th and 2nd Ave by the time this tunnel is completed) while the Q does the Queens Blvd Local to 71st Continental. At the moment a terminus at 57th is in a way ideal because the demand for northbound express trains on the Broadway BMT consists of just intra Manhattan riders and the N train is always a viable alternative for them in the event the R has a problem on its lengthy route. |
|
|
| (557750) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by error46146 on Tue Jan 22 16:03:25 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea, posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Tue Jan 22 15:54:35 2008. MTA adding more trains on the R?? in your dreams!!they wouldn't give two shits about the people that ride the R line! |
|
|
| (557751) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Tue Jan 22 16:04:33 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea, posted by error46146 on Tue Jan 22 16:03:25 2008. If it were extended, they WOULD add more trains. |
|
|
| (557754) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by error46146 on Tue Jan 22 16:09:18 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea, posted by WillD on Tue Jan 22 16:01:08 2008. That would be a good idea! R to 57th/7th and Q to Continental! |
|
|
| (557755) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Tue Jan 22 16:09:56 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea, posted by error46146 on Tue Jan 22 15:50:53 2008. The R is already bad enough the way it is because it is so long and slowExactly. Even the 4th Av Express isn't really suitable. What's really needed is the Metro South Commuter Railroad tunnel... |
|
|
| (557756) | |
Re: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Tue Jan 22 16:11:04 2008, in response to Re: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas, posted by error46146 on Tue Jan 22 15:51:49 2008. And if you're wondering about the missing (G) train, it's being filled in with the East River, and replaced by the B54 bus until the (MJ) line can be rebuilt! (Or alternatively I screwed up...) |
|
|
| (557758) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea (was: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas) |
|
|
Posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Tue Jan 22 16:17:18 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea (was: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas), posted by WillD on Tue Jan 22 15:50:14 2008. A better route would be to pass a bit to the north of the bridge and intercept the SIR ROW around Tompkins Ave or a bit west of there. I don't know if you intend to rebuild the SI Expressway HOV lanes for heavy rail, but there should be sufficient room to create a junction between the SIR and R train there. That provides the maximum amount of route flexibility, allowing trains to run from Tottenville, Arlington, or perhaps even St George through the tunnel to NY.I was actually looking towards a new Mid-Island route that was built to NYCT's standards and separate from the operations of the 4-car SI Railway. The Bus/HOV Lanes could be torn up and built over as there is sufficient space along the entire length of the SIE for a rail line in the median along with it's stations. The problem in the West Shore Light Rail though, would be in getting it to connect with the North Shore Line in Mariner's Harbor and then bringing it up to the Bayonne Bridge shortly after. |
|
|
| (557759) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Tue Jan 22 16:20:39 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea, posted by error46146 on Tue Jan 22 15:50:53 2008. The (R) train is only the subway line that's gets close to Staten Island. We don't know what state the subway will be in years from now, as the R could always have more trains added as everyone else stated. |
|
|
| (557760) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jan 22 16:20:59 2008, in response to (R) Extension Idea, posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Tue Jan 22 14:54:06 2008. You DO NOT WANT to extend the (R) train to Staten Island whatever you do.I have examined time tables, etc and have determined that that routing would TAKE LONGER than using the Ferry. LION has recommended using LRV on the bridge. Usurp one lane in each direction, then run it via the BQE ROW, probably on a new level, then may hap through the BBT via shared access with at traffic lane. As long as the LRV was non-stop in Brooklyn and on its own ROW it would be faster than the boat. Otherwise it would not be so. Realistically, this connection (yours or mine) to SI is a non-starter. A six mile tunnel from SF *is* a good plan, but this too will not happen, nor is it on my short list of transit dreams. ROAR |
|
|
| (557762) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jan 22 16:30:04 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea, posted by error46146 on Tue Jan 22 16:09:18 2008. BAD IDEA.Read my LION: Broadway Express: Manhattan Bridge -- via 63rd Street Broadway Local: Montague Tunnel -- 60th Street Tunnel In any event 57th will CEASE to be a terminal of any sort once the Second Avenue Subway starts up. LION SAYS: (Q) Broadway Express 125th Street to Coney Island via Brighton (N) Broadway Express 125th Street to Coney Island via Sea Beach (R) Broadway Local Forest Hills to Ft. Hamilton via Montague (W) Broadway Local Astoria to City Hall / Whitehall / or 9th Avenue LION also says: ROAR |
|
|
| (557764) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jan 22 16:34:11 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea, posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Tue Jan 22 16:20:39 2008. Close to Staten Island is not good enough, especially way out there.IF SI *needs* a subway connection, it makes more sense to extend the 2nd Avenue Subway to Tottenville, and also via the North Shore. Use LRVs to make feeders from the inner island to the subway lines. But SI streets are narrow. to do this would ELIMINATE PARKING on major streets. ROAR |
|
|
| (557766) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea (was: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas) |
|
|
Posted by DCmetrogreen on Tue Jan 22 16:39:54 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea (was: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas), posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Tue Jan 22 16:17:18 2008. I Still like a LIRR-style commuter line running under Richmond Ave from Etlingville to the North Shore, crossing into NJ, Using either existing trackage or running under Kennedy Blvd to Grand ST, NJ and going under the Hudson to WTC. It would serve many areas of SI without service and allow for direct travel to Manhattan. |
|
|
| (557768) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea (was: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas) |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jan 22 16:51:25 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea (was: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas), posted by DCmetrogreen on Tue Jan 22 16:39:54 2008. Never Never happen.Keep on the New York side of the river. No point in getting denials from three governments instead of just one. ROAR |
|
|
| (557779) | |
Re: Subway to Staten Island by way of St. George |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Tue Jan 22 17:43:05 2008, in response to (R) Extension Idea, posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Tue Jan 22 14:54:06 2008. If subway service is finally extended to Staten Island via the R, Staten island's CBD, will be bypassed. If you look at the below map, which is guaranteed to have boundary errors, you'll see CBDs represented by colored areas.View Larger Map While St. George is not today a significant CBD, it is in the best interest of everyone for it to become so. Subway service to Staten Island should enter St George. This will stimulate development in an area equipped to handle growth. In addition, great efficiencies can also be achieved if the SIR becomes part of the subway system. This would get a lot of cars and busses off of the road, and improve the quality of life in Staten Island. |
|
|
| (557780) | |
Re: Subway to Staten Island by way of St. George |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Tue Jan 22 17:45:00 2008, in response to Re: Subway to Staten Island by way of St. George, posted by Russ on Tue Jan 22 17:43:05 2008. Oh yeah, the green and red areas represent emerging or potential CBDs. |
|
|
| (557833) | |
Re: Subway to Staten Island by way of St. George |
|
|
Posted by FarRock on Tue Jan 22 19:31:27 2008, in response to Re: Subway to Staten Island by way of St. George, posted by Russ on Tue Jan 22 17:43:05 2008. Name the route (WU) since it will go to the home of the Wu Tang Clan. |
|
|
| (557880) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Tue Jan 22 22:05:12 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jan 22 16:30:04 2008. So you want to give the SAS two Broadway express services and cut Astoria's service to one train which is local the length of Manhattan? That simply does not make any sense.Thanks to Dekalb you could easily change routes such that the R becomes the Broadway Express from Staten Island via the bridge with a northern terminus at 125th and Lexington, and the Q becomes the Broadway local from Coney Island via the tunnel to 71st and Continental while the N remains unaltered from today. The advantage of this is that not only does it slightly streamline SI commuters' trips to Midtown, but it gives Brighton riders a choice between the Q through downtown and the B to midtown. Of course by the time the R runs from SI to 125th on the SAS its nearly as long as just running to 71st and Continental. Thus there may be no point in swapping northern terminals in the name of keeping route lengths acceptably short. |
|
|
| (557893) | |
Re: Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Jan 22 22:46:03 2008, in response to Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas, posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Tue Jan 22 12:40:17 2008. Tired? None of the trains here have tires. That's Paris Metro style . . . |
|
|
| (557900) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jan 22 23:04:18 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea, posted by WillD on Tue Jan 22 22:05:12 2008. Nobody is cutting Astoria service. We run just as many trains as the line can handle.BUT.... Astoria is served by the 60th Street Tunnel, ergo IT IS A LOCAL. LION thinks that Second Avenue can use more service than either the (Q) or the (N) can provide alone. And the (N) does have to go somewhere. IF express trains will no longer use the 60th Street Tunnel, then it MUST use the 63rd Street Tunnel. From there it can go to 125th Street or to Forest Hills. If it goes to Forest Hills then the (R) must go to Astoria. Also as soon as the express trains are extended to 63rd Street, 57th Street can no longer be a terminal. The LION *did* think about sending the (N) to Queens, but others have dissuaded him of this notion, and now he agrees that both the (N) and the (Q) need to serve 125th Street, until such a time as the Lower Second is built and in service, then the (T) can replace the (N) and we can rethink the status of the (N). ROAR |
|
|
| (557971) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 23 05:45:07 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea, posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Tue Jan 22 15:34:42 2008. This would be a more realistic approach than my rather absurd idea of building a 5-mile long (1) train tunnelI prefer your rather absurd idea of building a 5 mile long (1) train tunnel. The only limitation of that idea is $$$. It is otherwise the best way to extend the subway to SI. An (R) extension to SI is a waste of money. From a cost-benefit standpoint, SIR to Ferry is better then such a boondoggle. |
|
|
| (557972) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 23 05:47:58 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jan 22 16:30:04 2008. Roaring with you! |
|
|
| (557973) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 23 05:49:15 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea, posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Tue Jan 22 16:09:56 2008. Agreed. |
|
|
| (558041) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Wed Jan 23 11:16:37 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea, posted by WillD on Tue Jan 22 22:05:12 2008. You cannot change routes at DeKalb.Sure the tracks and switches *are* there, but time in the schedule and the demands of a high tph completely prohibit it. Read my LION: IT CANNOT BE DONE ROAR |
|
|
| (558103) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Jan 23 15:46:51 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jan 22 23:04:18 2008. now he agrees that both the (N) and the (Q) need to serve 125th StreetAstoria will do just fine with 6 W trains per hour. |
|
|
| (558146) | |
Something Less Drastic |
|
|
Posted by Kriston Lewis on Wed Jan 23 17:17:07 2008, in response to Yet another thread rehashing tired service change ideas, posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Tue Jan 22 12:40:17 2008. At least I think it is:A Division  : Abandon Cortlandt Street, permanently. Let's show the Port Authority we mean business. : Express service expanded until 1:00 am. : 2008 Expansion Plan : Begin New Lots Avenue service at 10:30 pm; add three rush hour trips to/from New Lots Avenue. : Extend to Brooklyn all times, except nights. White Plains  service runs express to Gun Hill Road, then local. : Pelham Express runs until 10:00 pm. : Flushing Express runs until 11:00 pm.B Division  : Discontinue service to Ozone Park, current rush hour and late night service retained. All service runs to/from the Rockaways, with some additional service terminating at Howard Beach-JFK. Express service runs until 11:30 pm : 2008 Expansion Plan : Extend to Ozone Park, expand to 10-car trains. Reduce headways to 8 minutes to compensate, service now ends at 11:30 pm. : End late night express service in Manhattan. : No changes : End late night service on the 63rd Street Line. Late night service will run via the 53rd Street tunnel. Late night local service is restored. : Terminate at Court Square, permanently. Extend to Chruch Avenue, all times. : After express track construction is completed, begin express service between Marcy Avenue and Sutphin Boulevard. Express service will run in the peak direction from 5am to 11pm. Terminates at Broad Street, all times. Skip-stop service discontiuned. : Add some short turn trips to Broadway Junction on the regular. : Discontinue service, replaced with the  . (Yeah, I caved to this.) : Add weekend express service, skips 49th Street, except nights when all service is local. Remove from Astoria and run along the Second Avenue Line to 125th Street. Or the Bronx. : Discontinue late night express service. Service will continue to use the Manhattan Bridge. Late night service runs to 21st Street-Queensbridge. : No changes. The 2008 plan is shelved. : Construct the Second Avenue Subway in to the Bronx (via Third Avenue) and into Brooklyn (via Utica Avenue, somehow): Merge with the , running from Forest Hills to Middle Village, via the Queens Boulevard, 53rd Street, Sixth Avenue, Jamaica, and Myrtle Avenue Lines. Add weekend service, current late night Myrtle shuttle retained. : Add weekend service to make up for the now running express and bypassing 49th Street. Those Kings Highway trips will now be publicized. : Demoted to local service. Skip-Stop service discontinued. Runs weekdays from 5am to 11pm.That's it. Maybe it is drastic. But these are crack plans. |
|
|
| (558152) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Wed Jan 23 17:22:19 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea, posted by AlM on Wed Jan 23 15:46:51 2008. Actually, I'd run about 20 maybe more (W) trains per hour.Why did you think I would run so few trains? ROAR |
|
|
| (558159) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by Kriston Lewis on Wed Jan 23 17:31:39 2008, in response to (R) Extension Idea, posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Tue Jan 22 14:54:06 2008. I was thinking more of merging the Staten Island Railway and the 1. I wouldn't mind this too. |
|
|
| (558160) | |
Re: (R) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by Kriston Lewis on Wed Jan 23 17:33:02 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea, posted by R42 4787 on Tue Jan 22 15:04:51 2008. Get rid of the road. |
|
|
| (558201) | |
Re: (1) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 23 19:09:38 2008, in response to Re: (R) Extension Idea, posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 23 05:45:07 2008. That I agree on:Having the 1 go to Staten Island, and perhaps continue on the SIR (converted to IRT standards if so) might be the way to go in this instance, especially if you can eventually get the IRT station platforms extended to allow for 12-car trains instead of the current 10. |
|
|
| (558202) | |
Re: Something Less Drastic |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 23 19:19:31 2008, in response to Something Less Drastic, posted by Kriston Lewis on Wed Jan 23 17:17:07 2008. Some good thoughts, but:>>A Discontinue service to Ozone Park, current rush hour and late night service retained. All service runs to/from the Rockaways, with some additional service terminating at Howard Beach-JFK. Express service runs until 11:30 pm>> >>C Extend to Ozone Park, expand to 10-car trains. Reduce headways to 8 minutes to compensate, service now ends at 11:30 pm.>> Do you mean having the C run to Lefferts (I say this because the Aqueduct Racetrack and Aqueduct-North Conduit stops are both also in Ozone Park)? This is something I noted about in another thread that I think might be worth doing, with the A running full-time to Far Rockaway. As for the M-V, I would have the late night shuttle on that line run Metropolitan-West 4th (so riders have a transfer to the 6th and 8th avenue lines), otherwise, I would have that line run as the V at all times. The M would be a rush-hour only train in that scenario, running perhaps Essex Street-Bay Parkway. If you have the F leave 63rd, while yes, until the SAS is built you could extend the Q to 21st-Queensbridge in the overnight hours, I would also have a shuttle run between 21st-Queensbridge and Roosevelt Avenue for those who do want to go via 63rd in the overnight hours. |
|
|
| (558206) | |
Re: (T) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Wed Jan 23 19:27:19 2008, in response to Re: (1) Extension Idea, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 23 19:09:38 2008. While that's an intriguing idea, I'd like to see how much such a tunnel would cost. I've got a feeling that these three projects would cost much less:1) T to Court St 2) Connector between Hoyt-Schermerhorn and Pacific St. 3) Tunnel from 65 St to St. george. At that point it would be possible to explore merging the T with the SIR. |
|
|
| (558217) | |
Re: (1) Extension Idea |
|
|
Posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Wed Jan 23 20:24:29 2008, in response to Re: (1) Extension Idea, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 23 19:09:38 2008. I agree with both of you! The (1) extension is the only one that would actually be worthwhile for Staten Island and it's growth and ever increasing traffic and transit dilemmas.But I feel that the SIR could easily remain separate from this (1) line extension. The SIR simply has too many stations that would have to be rebuilt to NYCT A Division standards. Every single station would require a fare-zone and currently only St. George has one. And then if a (1) train extension was connected to the SIR, they would have to completely demolish the current Tompkinsville station and remove the St. George terminus as they wouldn't be needed. A new station in between the two would have to be built at a deep-level underground in it's place and when it's all said and done, it's just too much money to think about on top of the 5-mile tunnel. Although, the line could have a deep-level station in St. George(Richmond Terr & Bay St) and terminate at Bay St & Victory Blvd. |
|
|
| (558287) | |
Re: Something Less Drastic |
|
|
Posted by monorail on Wed Jan 23 23:01:16 2008, in response to Something Less Drastic, posted by Kriston Lewis on Wed Jan 23 17:17:07 2008. 'But these are crack plans'thought they were a bit 'cracked'..... |
|
|
| (558306) | |
Re: Something Less Drastic |
|
|
Posted by CurAke79 on Wed Jan 23 23:33:10 2008, in response to Something Less Drastic, posted by Kriston Lewis on Wed Jan 23 17:17:07 2008. What program did you use to use the number and letter signs? |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
