Is De-Interlining Worth It? | De-Interlining Chronicles - The Finale
Вставка
- Опубліковано 22 лип 2024
- Yeah... the end of the De-Interlining series. Be happy.
Vanshnookenragen Track Map: www.vanshnookenraggen.com/_in...
TMC: / @tmc_bc
Music Featured in this video:
Music by F1fty Beatz - Me - thmatc.co/?l=19FDCF1C
Music by Naomi - Saturday Light - thmatc.co/?l=A0F40D9A
Music by Mark Generous - Journal - thmatc.co/?l=1A706118
Music by Jubileelee - BONDING AT NIGHT - thmatc.co/?l=7C16C5D5
My Gaming Channel: / mysticzeenoz
Join My Discord Server: / discord
Follow Me On Instagram: / mztransit
My Twitter: / realzeenoz
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @mystictransit
I make cool Transportation Videos, mostly revolving around Railfanning/Trainspotting, Station Tours, and Informational-Type videos. This is an overall chill channel, so if you like Transportation, Consider Subscribing!
#DeInterliningChronicles #LexingtonAvenueLine #NYCSubway - Авто та транспорт
Okay the new (5) tunnel from 138th to 3rd Avenue is really smart.
I remember working the 5 (the IRT's stepchild) back in 2004. It seemed that everything got priority over the 5. Almost anything would be an improvement
I agree. I've been taking the (5) train a lot recently, and it just seems like the slowest out of all IRT Lines. Something needs to be done at the various merging points it has on its route to give some level of improvement.
The 5 is just there to fill in the gaps.
Of course; whenever there is weekend track maintenance on the IRT, the 5 train doesn't even exist outside of being a 180 Street-Dyre Avenue shuttle in the Bronx.
I live near the Dyre Ave line and the service on the other IRT lines gets priority over the 5 line. There are times when the weekend service is on a 20 minute or more on headways when sharing tracks with the 4 and 6 lines which doesn't make sense.
As someone who depends on the 5 train Daily. The idea for the new tunnels would be great. I absolutely hate having to transfer at 149 - GC. And plus the 5 doesn’t really need to stop there since most transfers there are from the 4 to the 2 and vice-versa. The 5 does fill a lot of gaps especially during rush hours when it does peak direction service to/from Nereid Av.
Side note: here’s an idea for a future series. How about you talk about the best and worst transfers in the system.
I feel like the plan you put for the 5 to have a new set of tracks between Jerome and white plains is a great idea. Even though the 5 will skip grand concourse, it's still worth it to have less sharp curves in order to speed up service as it would take like about 2 minutes from Grand Concourse to 138 st when riding the 5
Exactly, and to be honest, the (5) skipping the station isn't a big deal. You would have a transfer to the (4) at 138th St, and the (2) at 3rd Avenue.
Three words: Cross. Platform. Transfer.
Indeed
@@TMC_BC One word: No.
One word: Yes
With the abandoned 142nd Street Tunnel, it could essentially be rebuilt to become a second Lenox Yard
Omfg…that Rogers Junction. What in the apple pie Christ were they thinking? 😵💫
Another way the Mott Junction could be "modified" is by making the line 4 tracks at 149 St - Grand Concourse. This would shift the merging point between the 2 and 5 back a bit to give trains more room.
If you want to take it even further, make the entire WPR line 4 tracks between E 180 and 149 - Grand Concourse in order to have the 2 and 5 completely separated. This would cause the 2 to become the express line between E 180 and 3 Av - 149 St, which would actually prevent merging issues currently seen at E 180.
I'd love to see WPR quad-tracked
Agreed 100% at least with the Queens Blvd portion. I grew up in Queens in the 90's and remember fondly how quick the E and F trains were back in the day. I hate how both have to slow down now at 36th St where the F splits. F makes an extra stop in Roosevelt Island and E sometimes have M trains in front of it on weekdays between Queens Blvd and 5th Ave 53rd St portion.
7:53 LOL the sassiness in your voice. im actually sad this series has ended. definitely agree with some of your changes
I 250% agreed with the impossible of selling a forced transfer at 149th street. Along with the loss of popular WPR - Lexington service, having the 5 run up Jerome would create a redundant service and over-serve Jerome Ave. The case could be made for more rush hours service on the line to allow the 4 to run express in the direction of traffic, but outside the rush, is there really a need for 20+ TPH on Jerome? The 5 would either become a rush hour-only route, which would be disastrous for Lexington Ave, or the rerouted trains would have to terminate at 149 St-Grand Concourse to continue providing service down the line, which would be a waste just to avoid merging delays.
And it’s actually a good thing that the (3) doesn’t go into the Bronx. Reason? Go on to the (2) and you will notice that it get crowded real fast heck but 3 ave 149th street it’s nearly impossible to get on it so the (3) train being pretty empty and having many seats available in Harlem is a very popular alternative for the packed (2) trains. Most I say is maybe extended up to Washington Heights. Stopping at Fredrick Douglas Blvd 153rd street Edgecombe avenue 165th street and finally Highbridge 177th street
Having the (3) train extended to Bronx will encourage everyone to get on the (3) train resulting in crowdings as well causing both the (2) and (3) to be packed hence removing any little amount of space left on the Lenox Avenue and 7th Avenue lines
There are plenty of ways to make the trains run faster. Hell, if the 2 and 5 flipped roles as peak-direction express as suggested back in 2000, both lines would run smoother. The problem is always ridership demands. If the riders don't want it, the idea will never work, regardless of how it's sold to them. Furthermore no matter how much the service would be increased it would still be seen as a loss of service options given over 100 years also when the line opened up.
Loved that joke, "remove your one seat rides" great video! I agree with most of the plans here minus that first one you mentioned related toward the 149th street situation.
I like the interlining the lines you proposed. It never made sense to have the F on the 63st line. They wanted more people to have access to Queens Blvd Express on said tunnels since there wasn’t a lot of people using it
Your simple idea will make a difference. A good one
Amazing Video I liked the N and Q running via Brighton, including Send 3 to Bronx.
I agree with alot of ur ideas about interlining, u the GOAT of this and I think mta should listen to some of ur configurations 💯👌🏾
As a European with alot of experience of various European transit systems?
Yeh, one seat rides are ideal
But if you've got good coverage, good frequencies, good interchanges (or better still - cross platform interchange between lines?) Switching between a line or two to make your journey? Doesn't really matter.
We have many options for “one seat rides” here, at the expense of capacity. Because of how some lines have disproportionate demand to one another, interlining is more difficult to schedule around. It’s an illusion of convenience.
Your "analysis" of potential station crowding at 149 St Grand Concourse fails to account for the increased capacity gained by rerouting trains via Jerome Ave. At present the whole station operates at ~3/4 capacity, particularly the (4) platforms at half capacity, because of the S-curve. The (4) platforms could reach their maximum capacity by eliminating the (5) and routing those trains to Jerome Ave, thereby absorbing as many transferring riders as there is capacity on the Lexington Ave Express. Doing so would also allow rush hour express service along Jerome Ave, which is currently possible given the infrastructure, but impractical because there just aren't enough trains on the line. Basically, the S-curve at 149 St is a scourge upon system capacity that should not be used for revenue service. Adding bypass tracks wouldn't alleviate the status quo, but rather entrench it.
If overcrowding really becomes an issue, then there's a solution that costs orders of magnitude less than new bypass tracks: expand the mezzanine and add stairs to the platforms -- something the MTA has gotten very good at. If it really comes to it, to where the narrow (4) platforms become unsafe from overcrowding, then they could deck over the center track and merge the two platforms into one big platform. I see no reason why 149 St shouldn't emulate the kind of high capacity transfer facilities found in other major-city transit networks, or why bypass tracks would be fundamentally necessary at this location.
Remember: schedule before electronics before concrete. The (5) is a bastard line that only really exists because of the constraints of Rogers Junction, and therefore will likely be phased out once that junction is improved with new crossovers. We shouldn't shoehorn the (5) into permanence with new tracks just because it provides a one seat ride from White Plains. That loss can be easily mitigated with a simplified and robust service pattern and a quick transfer. In fact, in a world where the (2) and the (4) each run every two minutes, the transfer would probably be QUICKER than taking the (5) through the dreaded S-curve.
As for increasing capacity via Lenox Ave so as to reroute the (5) without reducing capacity to White Plains, there's also a solution that costs less than new tunnels under the river: add a third track in a cut&cover trench that skirts along the western side of the existing tracks to 135 St, where the southbound platform is moved to the middle track, and the westernmost most track is partially retained as a bumper block terminal to serve a new shuttle platform that connects to 148 St via the new third track; riders would then connect to the northbound platform via a passageway under the tracks. Much cheaper than a redundant and circuitous tunnel, but the end result is still 30 tph between 7 Ave and the Bronx with regular service to 145 St. I'm sure the folks along Lenox Ave wouldn't mind having a little shuttle train all to themselves, if it means the folks along Jerome Ave get twice as many trains.
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Anybody who complains about losing their one seat ride can cry me a river.
I agree 100% with this
You guys are racist and I will not allow this
@@Amiri_Francis Yes it does
The narrator of this video has very good ideas with regards to the ind/bmt plans. I remember as a kid living in New York when the B train ran to 168th Street in Manhattan Washington heights during rush hours and the C which at that time used to be the double C "CC" with extend to Bedford Park boulevard along The concourse line during the day and Rush hours. That system was very convenient because it allowed passengers from the Bronx to have direct 8th Avenue service and upper Manhattan passengers had direct 6th Avenue and Brooklyn service with the B train. During off hours to be trained used to end at 57th Street and that was before they had the extended 53rd Street tunnel to queens. The idea of returning the C to Bedford Park and the B to 168th Street full time sounds like an excellent idea. Returning the r to Astoria is also a good idea and would be great if for when that line gets its extension to LaGuardia Airport. Definitely if that extension were built to LaGuardia Airport, there would be massive ridership on that R train.
I do like your de-interlining bit showcasing your changes of the different lines. Like sending the N and Q down Brighton and the B down to Sea Beach. The R going to Astoria is the best idea because the R is already a local line, best to shorten the northern end so it can turn around easier and avoid delays on the Queens Blvd line. With the W going to Jamaica-179 St, it should be extended past Whitehall St to Bay Pkwy on the D. Reason because (1) the West End Line has way too many stations and (2) the D line is already very long and wait times are lengthy. Having the W go down to Bay Pkwy, or even to Coney Island should speed up service along West End Line.
In terms of proposed extensions of the IND Second System, there were proposals of extensions along Northern Blvd or sending M,R (in this case M,W) trains past 67th Ave to Alley Pond Park - along Jewel & 73rd Avs. You should make a video of such proposed plans and your intake of such extensions. That area only sees bus service. If a Jewel Ave subway happens, best to send M service there. With a connection to a new station at Jewel Ave - Forest Hills, still connecting with the E and F. Late-nights, M service is already a full-time service because it uses 63rd St. W service can be eliminated late-nights. Also, a good thing to do is have E and F service switch past Forest Hills. (1) F service can utilize the express tracks, (2) W service will be local and would be able to connect between 179 St to Forest Hills, and E service should be local past Forest Hills because passenger miss the connection going from Van Wyck to Jamaica Center.
Also, I would like to see F service extended past 179 St to Glen Oaks and retain all 4 tracks. Then Hillside can see both express and Local Service.
The 3 should have 145th St platforms extended and have a new tunnel going to Woodlawn, so then peak service along Jerome Ave can be brought back. After Yankee Stadium, before 167th St, there are remants of the old 9th Ave El. The 3 can use this, go down to a new tunnel and service can be resumed again to the old Sedgwick Ave station (ofc underground), and the connect back to 145 St. If the Second Avenue Subway is extended to the Bronx, T service should go under 3rd Ave, and then connect at E180 St. It could then rise up and connect to the Eastchester-Dyre Ave line. 5 service would go along the White Plains Rd Line instead.
The change in Brooklyn makes a whole lot sense since it takes way to switch train traffic on the junction between Dekalb and the Manhattan Bridge. Also should include the W train into Brooklyn to add for more local services along the R since it takes forever for one to arrive. Also probably extend further on the west end line or sea beack line so the D or N or changed B can run express. The cost and Politics always put a damper or shuts down the proposal completely.
How I would de-interline the Subway System:
Rodgers Junction:
The 4 and 5 will both handle the Nostrand Avenue branch while the 2 and 3 continue along Eastern Parkway, with the 2 skipping both Nostrand and Kingston Avenue stations and terminating at Crown Heights-Utica Avenue while the 3 continues on to New Lots Avenue.
DeKalb Junction:
This one is gonna involve a lot of construction.
To start off, instead of having the R and W terminate at City Hall via the lower level, we construct a tunnel from the City Hall lower level to Fulton Street on the BMT Nassau line. The J/Z will be cut back to Chambers Street while the R and W take its place at Fulton and Broad Street stations, and continue along a brand new tunnel under the East River (which we’ll call the Henry Street Tunnel) and stop at a new station next to the New York Transit Museum. This new station will be known as “Atlantic Avenue-Court Street”, and following that station, both the R and W will split off from each-other with the R running to Hoyt-Schermerhorn Streets, replacing the C along the Fulton Street local, up to Euclid Avenue, while the W runs local with the G towards Church Avenue, making the F run full express all times (except during late nights).
The C and K will run local along both 4th Avenue, replacing the N and R, and 8th Avenue, with the K displacing the E to run express. The A and E will both run along both 8th Avenue and Fulton Street express, with the E replacing the A to Lefferts Boulevard. The C and K will replace both the R and W along the Montague branch up to DeKalb Avenue.
The B and D will run Express along 4th Avenue while the C and K handle local. The B will run along West End with the K up until Bay Parkway, where the B will terminate while the K continues down to Coney Island, while the D is displaced to Sea Beach. The C will continue down to Bay Ridge-95th Street.
The N and Q meanwhile will handle Brighton, with the N running express while the Q goes local. The Q will terminate at Brighton Beach while the N continues on to Coney Island.
At DeKalb Avenue itself, the C and K will stop at the inner tracks and the N and Q at the outer tracks while both the B and D skip the station entirely.
Queens Boulevard:
Like DeKalb, this will also involve construction.
Starting off with the 63rd Street Branch. We will build a new tunnel that connects the 63rd Street tunnel between Roosevelt Island and Queensboro Plaza. This will be dubbed the “Queensboro Connection”.
The M will run along 63rd Street, displacing the F to run along 53rd Street with the E like it did back in the 1990’s, and the M will run along the Queensboro Connection and the Astoria branch with the W up to Astoria-Ditmars Boulevard, however in the future, the two will be extended towards LaGuardia Airport.
The N will also replace the F along 63rd Street, and run local with the R along Queens Boulevard towards Forest Hills-71st Avenue.
The K will also run via a new branch: The 57th Street line. The line will see the lower level platforms of 50th street transformed into island platforms for the K on the left side while the E stops on the right, with the K running along 57th Street and under another new tunnel under the East River, towards Queens Plaza, via a brand new lower level.
The new branch sees the K stopping at:
6th-7th Avenues (Transfer to the M, N, Q, R and W)
Lexington Avenue-57th Street (Transfer to the 4, 5, 6, R and W, with free transfer to the M, N and Q at Lexington Avenue-63rd Street by using OMNY or MetroCard)
Roosevelt Island (Connect to the Roosevelt Island Tramway)
Court Square-44th Road (Transfer to the 7, E, F and G)
Queens Plaza (Transfer to the E, F, G and R)
The 57th Street branch also sees the extension of the G along Northern Boulevard. The Northern Boulevard branch will be a 4-track line, with the K running express while the G runs local. The 7 will also be extended up along Roosevelt Avenue.
The new Northern Boulevard line makes stops at:
Queens Plaza (G and K stop; transfer to the E, F and R)
36th Street (G stop; transfer to the N and R)
34th Avenue (G stop)
Broadway (G and K stop; transfer to the N and R)
68th Street (G stop)
75th Street (G stop)
81st-82nd Streets (G stop)
88th Street (G stop)
94th Street-Junction Boulevard (G and K stop)
101st Street (G stop)
108th Street (G stop)
Astoria Boulevard-Grand Central Parkway (G and K stop)
Mets-Willets Point (G stop)
Main Street-College Point Boulevard (G and K stop)
Parsons Boulevard (G stop)
149th Street (G stop)
160th Street (G and K stop; transfer to the 7)
Utopia Parkway-Francis Lewis Boulevard (G and K stop)
Clearview Expressway (G stop)
210th Street (G stop)
Bayside-Bell Boulevard (G and K stop; G TERMINUS)
Crocheron Park-Cross Island Parkway (K TERMINUS)
The Queens 7 extension will be a 3 track system, and see stops at:
Parsons Boulevard-Bowne Street (7)
150th Street (7)
Northern Boulevard-Crocheron Avenue (7) (Transfer to the G and K)
168th Street (7)
Utopia Parkway (7)
Francis Lewis Boulevard (7)
Clearview Expressway-Oceania Street (7)
Bell Boulevard (7)
Springfield-Cloverdale Boulevards-Cross Island Parkway (7)
Little Neck-Douglaston Parkway (7)
Little Neck Parkway-Marathon Parkway (7)
Bayview Avenue (7) (Express track ends here)
Great Neck Plaza (7 TERMINUS; Connect to the LIRR)
Now that there is a Grand plan to de-interline the NYC Subway, plus some new construction plans.
With your Deinterlining plan, I wasn’t too sure how you would handle late night and weekend service. For example, Would the c run on weekends? And would the b running in Brooklyn only on late nights?
Great video
Thanks!
How about a video explaining what interlining is, how it happened, the current routes that are affected by it, why it's good/bad, and a general overview for those of us not in the know. In addition to these armchair proposals that to my knowledge, have any real traction of happening with current funding and priorities on the MTA.
BTW love your vids! :-)
This is what I was thinking. Rebuild 149 on the 4 line to have 4 tracks. 5 trains will terminate on the inner tracks making 149 a new terminal for 5 trains. During rush hour some 5 trains will start or terminate at Woodlawn and run on the middle track in the peek direction. For 5 trains entering and leaving 149 there will be a new switch then 5 trains can stop at 138. With the trakes that take the 5 to 149 on the Lower level it can be rebuild to take trains that are out of service to the lenox yard. Or the 5 and 4 will run like the 2 and 5 so the Jerome Av line will have the 4 at all times and the 5 during rush hour.
How are you building that high speed flyover for the (5) at 149 St / Grand Concourse?
I'm suggest the Nassau And the 7 avenue lines CBTC will get installed sooner or later. Technically, I was thinking the Lexington CBTC would be Rare, and therefore, it would have always be interesting.
I agree with some things but service is needed to serve Jamaica Center, we need Express service on the Jerome Avenue line just like the Pelham line has and we need the C train to Lefferts Blvd to have all A train serve the Rockaways except late night that the Rockaway Park portion will be served by the shuttle
To all the series that I've watched of this [viral] de-interlining topic, I will have to say yes to it. Due to the current and critical state of the MTA, along with their situations every day, they going to have to step up game and flex by communicational alternatives and future plans to improve developmental phases in the long run-- if they want to have effective reliability. However, that is up to the main office of all commissions. Unfortunately, the time may have to be now, but it's not going to be easy. I know this certain type of topic from others that are 50/50 about it and I understand. You are the only train guy I know that ever discussed about this topic for months now and surprisingly on how many commented about that right away. Despite it is a finale, great video.
I think they should bring back D and Q service on Brighton, Q express via broadway and D local via 6 av. Both on the dekalb av station via outer (bridge) tracks and split from there
I think it's less painful to deinterline the branches of the Eastern Parkway Line because you can transfer from 2/3 to 4/5 or vice versa at any of the express stations along the line. But in the Bronx, there's only one place where you can transfer between them, and that's 149GC.
Can you do a video about the derail A train accident that occurred in 1997?
The best thing to do with the Lexington Ave., Line is to give it to CBTC
Exactly i totally agree with you 💯% The 4 5 6 lines needs CBTCS. They definitely need to focus on bringing the SAS 8 3rd Avenue Elevated line in the south Bronx. Bring the 3 trains to the Jerome Ave ninth Ave Elevated line Bronx to Burnside Avenue helping out the 4 line because the 4 is over crowding.
Leave the 5 train the way it is .
The 5 trains 🚃 has CBTCS between East 180 street eastchester Dyer Avenue. The R62AS cannot run between E 180 between Dyer Avenue no more only the R142s could run between East 180 street between Dyer Avenue. I will be glad when the 4 6 lin
Can you share the the map please in the comments
I'd have the A and C run local after Port Authority and the B and D run express on CPW. Send the A to 168th St, B to Inwood, C to Bedford Park, D to 205th St. That way, neither borough loses express service and we can still deinterline fine.
Same. Concourse carries more people from further away so I feel that should get express service.
Why don’t you send the B to bay ridge and the R via west end and then D via sea beach.
What is deinterlining. I am confuse with the definition.
I'll give u my thoughts on the IND Queens Blvd swap the F and M on 63rd n 53rd and run the F via 63rd late nights n evenings when the M is not running past Essex. Bring the G back to the Blvd to Continental evenings n weekends since all dist 5 lines are 160s now. B and C service is ok as it is now but swapping them back would result in less transferring along CPW from 145 to 59. C weekend service 168/EUC. The C to Rockaway Park is too long as well unless you take the 5 Showcases and give them back to the C and make it 59 to Rockaway Pk local.
That’s Better Having F train Returning to 53 Street Line
This is why the 4 train skips 138th St in the peak rush hour so that the 5 is utilizing the local & the 4 can go straight to 149th GC without delaying the 5.
The problem I have is that with the M & W both on 63rd & the E & F on 53rd, there's NO LOCAL SERVICE at Queens Plaza & NO EXPRESS option from Roosevelt Island & 21-Queensbridge. Solution, 36th Street is rebuilt in the style of Bergen St with express trains having the option to switch to the upper local tracks if need be ...
There could also be a Northern Boulevard station between 21st Street Queensbridge and 36th Street to act as a transfer to trains at Queens Plaza, which was part of the 1968 Program for Action before being cut.
Who has priority at Rogers, The 2 or the 5? I always wonder which one board when both trains ariive simultaneously at Franklin Avenue
Kinda dependents, and it’s honestly annoying to all the riders.
If you want 5 train riders to keep using 149th st Grand Concourse probably built a platform on the new connector track then link it to the existing complex South Ferry since 2009 Jay Street-metrotech 2010 2011 Court Square September 28th 2012 Bleecker St. B Train Sea Beach will that be 24/7 or weekdays only?
No one really uses the 5 to transfer to the 4.
Actually, the whole Dyre Av / Wakefield patterns is based more on which passengers need service to Brooklyn. Less Dyre passengers go to Brooklyn than White Plains Road passengers, which is why on weekends where the 2 goes to South Ferry, the 2 and 5 are swapped in the Bronx as well
In my opinion, the 2/5 swap should be permanent. No idea why they switched it up in 1965.
During rush hours, the 2 should be the express, running super-express to Nereid. (Yes, I kept the rush hour extension because the 2 now needs yard access.)
@@toters2724 Sorry for responding to this late, but I do think the current pattern with the 2 to Wakefield is better, as the 2 is a full-time service and it's more heavily utilized. Also, there can't be a "super-express to Neried" due to there not being connecting switches between the express and local track between 233 St and Neried Av.
Actually you wouldn’t need to abandon 148 lenox, It could stay as another terminus on the 3 train just how some 5 trains terminate at dyre avenue and some at nereid.
3s/4s used to terminate at Flatbush.... 5s to Utica. 2s to N. Lots.
ithink the b and c trains going back the the old days having the b going to 168 and the c going to bfpb that would be good for one seat rides from fluton on concourse.
On another note, how is the elevator project going at 149th?
Oh... so that's what all that construction is...
HELL.
@@MysticTransit u didn’t know💀
Much like the 5 train in the Bronx the M train is way too popular to remove. sending the M train back to Nassau Street will likely cause a sudden drop in ridership and reasult in severe overcrowding on essex street the F train already overcrowded during rush hours from Brooklyn and it would also put more pressure on the L train as it once again leaves the L train as the only direct route to midtown in Williamburg
Nah a mere one seat rides ain’t worth keeping delaying service for a mere faster midtown
How will it cause a sudden drop in ridership? Jobs don’t suddenly disappear when some false illusion of convenience is removed…
@@TMC_BC How dare you plan to commit a crime
@@5trainfanatic Yes
@@5trainfanaticOh good lord not this shit again
I would reroute the trains in Rogers Junction to as follows:
(2) to Nostrand Avenue
(3) to New Lots Avenue
(4)(5) to Crown Heights
As for the 149th Street and 142nd Street junctions, they are the hardest parts for me to decide about deinterlining at this point (harder than 59th Street). Had it not been for COVID, I would have supported full deinterlining here. However, thanks to it, preference for Lexington Ave outweighs 7th Ave in Dyre Ave, making deinterlining a big issue, since that goes against the demand of Lexington Avenue in Dyre. I think the smoothening of the curve to merge at 3rd Ave instead of Grand Concourse at 149th Street should come first. Then, if demand of Dyre Avenue shifts favor to 7th Avenue, then we can think of all the deinterlining there.
The only issue with that is crown heights capacity is limited
Why would you replace the R with W???? The R train can be extended to 179, W remain unchanged, but adding all day service
Because the M becomes full-time, meaning Queens Blvd-Bway service becomes part-time
Plus the R will be moved to Astoria full time and later even LGA, N will either be moved to SAS with the Q, which will make either the N or Q a weekday only train, depends on which runs express in Brightion as the weekday only brighton express since both N and Q will go brighton, or move the N to QBL after 63 to 179 st, running express
So then what happens to all of your ideas of e and k to Brooklyn
Nothing happens. The ugliest parts of the DeKalb interlocking affect 4th Ave express but not local, so the B/D to Sea Beach/West End gets affected but not the E/K. The R would terminate at City Hall.
You think that was bad? Remember when we planned to put BMT on Pelham?
You finally said something about rogers, but just breezed on by it. I was very let down from what you said in discord
lol. The original plan was to go in-depth, but that was not the point of this video, plus, I previously talked about rogers junction.
That I was in the 70s and 80s have a good day
i say keep the 5 where it is and make the 3 spit off the 2 and 5 at 3av 149st, and have it go via melrose/webster ave to terminate at east gun hill road
0:20 - Shouts out everyone, especially TMC
Also 0:20 - Shows everyone, except TMC
So the M train would be full time now since now it’s running by itself via 63rd Street if this ever happens?
Yes.
Yea and QBL-Bway (W) serving is weekday only
Yes
@@m34tgaming16 W is full time as welo
Ye especially if you move the W to West end it would serve 24/7, just on weekends and late nights it will be from Coney Island to Whitehall instead of Forest Hills but weekdays it would almost reintroduce its 2003 service pattern
I Want The Concourse Line Making it 4 Tracks Instead of 3 Because of Rush hours Going up and Down if does happen in the future they would need to close that line Down For several months or A Year Temporary Having The D Train moved to inwood-207 along with A train and Also maybe having B Train to Queens to 21 Street Queensbridge or Forest Hills or 168 Street in Washington Heights.
Why are we getting rid of the 5???
Also, for the N/Q pairing on Brighton, send on through the tunnel (N) and the other over Manhattan Bridge (Q)
Sending the (N) through the tunnel would be a headache because of the merging near Canal and Dekalb.
@@MysticTransit just a thought, considering that the N already runs through the tunnel during late nights
The R will run all day service with its full route from Bay Ridge to Astoria, which the N can just be a weekday only if it runs brightion express, if you keep the N on astoria despite having the R, you could cut back the N to Atlantic av on weekends and late nights if not moved to Brightion, making the D 4 av/West End local
We’re getting rid of the 5 because it cannibalizes frequencies on other lines
@@TMC_BC Removing the 5 is a very bad idea. The Lexington Ave Line is one of the most overcrowded lines. The (4/6) will not be able handle all Lexington service. A simple solution is to rebuild the (5) connection to the WPR Line, is to make it bypass 149th St-GC straight to 3rd Av-149th St. 149th St is not a big place for (5) customers so it is okay.
Honestly I would put the Q on West End and have the D replace it seabeach needs its weekend service. Also the five would have to run on weekends in order for it to work. The four is the only service on weekends to new lots is not enough service
The (5) already runs on weekends.
First, the 5 will be the one going express to Utica Av at all times except late nights, playing it simple, the 2 and 3 will both go to Flatbush.
Your point about throwing the Q and West and the D to sea beach would be alright, but with your plan we would not change the D and the Q will do Sea Beach
Instead of making a new tunnel for the Lenox Avenue Line, I support the Tech and Transit Association plan which involves the 142nd street junction and 135th street station should getting reconfigured to eliminate the junction and have a shuttle replace the Lenox Ave line north of 135th Street. The 3 will take over the 5 and the 5 will become a support line for the 4 up to Bedford Park Blvd, which should get reconfigured into a 4 track station to terminate 5 trains. 149th Street - Grand Concourse would get expanded to accommodate the passengers transferring. While this is controversial, this would be better than waiting 6 minutes for a 5 that ends up getting delayed at 149th street and end reverse branching on White Plains south of East 180th Street
Here how to Fix the A Divison
The (1) and (6) are already 100% Deinterlined But All that the (6) needs is CBTC and converting the Westchester Square station imto a express station and reconfiguring the tracks that delay would be gone as currently locals and expresses at Parkchester have to merge in front of one another causing delays
As for 149th GC Deinterlining
My Response at first i was hesitant to Deinterline White Plains But after some thoughts about to what Mystic Transit said about we should sacrifice capacity for one seat rides and i disagree after watching TTA's reverse branching video the whole way throigh now i support Deinterlining White Plains this involves the 142nd Street Junction and the 135th Street station getting reconfigured the current Southbound platform would be converted for shuttle trains while the current Northbound platform would be converted into an island platform while the Bronx Bound Track would be moved to the East serving the (2) and (3) trains. 149th street GC would be expanded to accommodate the transfering commuters. With (3) getting extended to the Bronx taking over service to Dyre, while the (5) will become a support line for the (4) up to Bedford Park Blvd which should get reconfigured into a 4 track line to accommodate short turn terminating (5) trains.on the outer tracks while (4) trains wod continue to Woodlawn on the Inner tracks, as Woodlawn can only handle 24 TPH. While this is controversial, this would be better than waiting 6 minutes for a (5) train that ends up getting delayed at 149th Street GC and end reverse branching on White Plains south of East 180th Street eliminating the C curve.
For the 5 line I think it’s best if it only runs to bowling green and make it run every 12 minutes. Flatbush terminal was not made for 2 lines to share with only 2 tracks in service. Running it every twelve minutes all day would help reduce congestion at 149th and all thought Lexington ave in Manhattan.
So if their proposal is to eliminate the five line to Dyre Avenue which by the way I live by so that means we have to take the new train up East 180th Street and take the five train the rest of the way.
No, you’d take the 3 into Manhattan. No transfers involved, unless you want to go to the East Side.
@@TMC_BC okay but what about those stops in between sometimes the five train will run Express or local and when the 5 train goes to East 180th Street people transfer to the 2 train so they can get back to those missing stop that they wanted to get off at. In my personal opinion I think the 5 train is just fine the way it is they don't need to change it they can change the junction that's causing the delay or figure out a way to time it so that one train is passing by in that Junction while the other train is not waiting there too long.
@@TMC_BC As a commuter of the 2 and 5 lines, NO. Anyone who actually lives here doesn’t want that.
@@peskypigeonx I don’t actually care what people want, they still have to use it. WPR ridership is so high, that scheduling under the current arrangement causes many problems. De-Interlining fixes that, making it more reliable and less prone to delays.
@@TMC_BC -_- thanks for not listening
👍
For IND Central Park West you have to make the B/D local A/C express. The D train cut back to Bedford Park Blvd. Both C/D should operate on Bronx all day to encourage ridership. Late D train replaces C train to Norwood 205th street. A/B is tricky cause to do that I believe it would have to be at the expense of cutting weekends/late night B train service to Atlantic Avenue since no route operates more than three routes on weekends, the A at those times stop at 163rd street and 155th street. For Queens Blvd agreed M train should be the main local operation all times except overnight hours and W train is the weekday only supplementary local. You are advised to expand BMT Eastern Division to 10 cars to make it happen
0:26 rart cameo go brrr
The 4 should skip 138th St., grand Concourse, days and nights
Thanks🦹🏾♀️
De interlining is never the solution
Why?
@@TheRailLeaguer a few factors, one direct service and transfers would be unbalanced where you have to resort to one over the other and vice versa while it may be convenient to some, others dislike the idea. Two stations on the IRT 149 street grand concourse and Franklin avenue where the 5 serves while represent the Lexington line while sharing the tracks with the 2 despite how the connection is poorly built and utilize and removing the 5 or changing it would make things difficult. Second, it not a simple solution as making those changes would cause some controversy. The G train is a perfect example of being cut back to court sq resulted in a permanent transfer at that station which is a pain in a neck during rush hours and it would have the same reason with the DeKalb and Atlantic Barclays center where between the two trains of the sixth avenue subway and the BMT Broadway line where deinterlacing would resort to a transfer at Barclays which is the same problem as the G in having to make the connection on opposite ends which is too much to handle at rush hour. Three, having two individual routes with the same color is annoying, as you cannot expect to the share the tracks the entirely as it defeats the fundamentals and ideals to create a series of complex routes as a network to serve the boroughs with the help of buses to handle the network on the surface and rail network through the tri state and so on but aside from that, there no singular lines these are multiple lines in a form of trunks like tree branch with the idea of connecting wires or pipes functioning in a similar matter to how the flow of water or electricity or think like body system and it's needs to support it. Back to the two routes with the same color doesn't do much as the C,V,W and Z are useless in carbon copy the trains A,F,J and the N which operate 24/7. They parallel the other in terms of local while the other is express with other portion of the route involved sharing the tracks with some conflict if the timing is off and the headaways are unbalanced. The Z supplement the J the entire route with the northern terminal suppressed to 12 trains per hour and sharing the route portion with the M train, it's limited and the Z hardly runs. C conflicts with the A between canal and hoyt and so does the N with the R or W northbound while it affects the Q southbound so there are some issues. Also it not required to run two on the same route it both of them operate 24 7.
@@ianhardy9375hat’s not really a valid excuse. When done correctly, it would result in balanced service for everyone, with service being more consistent. In fact, only a few interlines would remain, such as the 149th Street station for the 5, Chrystie Street for the M, etc. The 149th Street one would be rebuilt so that the 5 train merge can occur between 149th Street-Concourse and 3rd Avenue-149th Street, allowing for the route to bypass the former station (used by pretty much nobody). Ones like the Rogers Junction really need to go, and quite frankly, everyone would be much happier if the Rogers Junction were to be deinterlined with two new switches past the junction.
Also having two individual routes with the same color is not annoying. In fact, it’s actually better than what was done before 1979.
The rebuilt junction was once planned as part of the "New MTA A Program for Action" during the 60s.
The Rodgers Junction was also under review for revision...
You aren't far off base with ideas..
The Queens Blvd reroutes are pretty good ideas.. but the general consensus is the TA takes COST into consideration...man hours.. operating...in the overall sense.
How much is it gonna cost to operate said line over the way it use to be..more milage on the equipment...manpower..wear and tear... merging.. schedules... planning...
A lot goes into operations planning...
The reason Why the M line works is because it actually closes a gap in service between neighborhoods that could actually use the service.
When the M operated late into the evening along Sixth Avenue and Second Ave..there was Enough PROVEN RIDERSHIP TO KEEP THE SERVICES GOING...
However,the OPERATING BUDGET ONLY CALLED FOR LIMITED FUNDING FOR A LIMITED SERVICE.
The Weekend service cuts from 2010 is STILL in full effect.
The B line is needed along Sixth Avenue and Central Park West...the M is needed for Queens Blvd service.
The 2 can and Should operate more than every 12 to 15 minutes on middays and weekends.
There are plenty of changes to the system that SHOULD BE MADE...the E and M should remain together...and the R should be rerouted to the 63rd st tunnel.
Five train to Bedford park college
no.
🦹🏾♀️🦹🏾♂️
Montague is French
And it's pronounced monta-gyu or monta-cue
Ok, this interline would be impossible + if 148th st station closed the people who lived their would have a hard time getting home by foot after getting off at 145 st+if the dyre av line was removed oh that would cause chaos for people who originally was Lexington ave line and Lexington av line is more reliable and IRT should not get the removal of the 5 line cause it would be chaotic and if different tracks where their it may be so chaotic delays may be more constant
No it won’t 148th is one block from 145th street station!!!!!
@@qjtvaddict ok ok ok chill geez
NO! I want more de-interlining! How about my previous proposal for sending the (E) to Brooklyn & Staten Island?
That’s extensions not deinterlining
No plz don’t put the N on Brighton
We are going to put the (N) on Brighton.
@@MysticTransit …
@@MysticTransit …
Suck it, the N is going on Brighton
@@TMC_BC NO