Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
Should The (C) Line Be Extended to Lefferts Blvd?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 сер 2024
- Among many of the NYC Subway extension proposals, one, which seemingly requires no extra miles of trackage, sticks out, and that is an extension of the (C) Line to Lefferts Blvd. Is this a good idea though? And should the MTA pursue this extension?
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!
#NYCSubway #CTrain #MTA
I think that makes plenty of sense. As opposed to having the A train travel to 2 different destinations, I've always thought the C train to Lefferts Blvd would be a great idea! I live West of Hudson and don't know much about the subway system. Anybody agree or disagree with me and why? I like to hear other people's thoughts. Also like learning more about the NYC subway system. There seems to be a lot I don't know about the MTA.
I fully agree. One, it causes merging issues with other (A)’s at Rockaway Blvd, and forces the MTA to split frequency on the line.
I agree. My main concern though, is that this might cause some more crowding due to the larger gaps between the (C)'s. This could be solved in the near future tho, with the added R211s having more trains in circulation. AKA more trains = more efficient (A) and (C) service :]
@@MysticTransit Gotcha, makes a lot of sense to extend the C for sure then.
@@boggy6082 Very true. I guess with less frequency the stations will get more packed, but I absolutely agree that the problem can be solved. I believe they can work on it. Those R211Ts will come in real handy with the open gangways.
@@MysticTransit yes it definitely does, and it’s more work for the MTA, the C should take lefferts blvd and during late nights it will be a shuttle from lefferts to Euclid
I think reconstructing the interlocking between Euclid Ave., Station Grant Avenue station on the A and C line is a great idea. You can reconfigure the signal Interlaken Inn for Track in underground to make this happen And extending the a in the sea passed Lefferts via subway or elevated into Cambria heights is the right way to go. It might be expensive but long-term it would benefit Queens train riders
But then what about reconstruction at 80th, 88th street and Rockaway Blvd? I believe they only have one express track in the middle. It can work during rush hour having the A be express between Euclid and Rockaway Blvd while the C remains local to Lefferts and beyond should they choose to reconstruct.
And I agree with extending the A or C extending to Cambria because that area isa desert and there’s no LIRR service there. At first I said let the E and J train do that but this works too. I think the track should have some type of connection to the Air train. Then it can continue on Liberty Avenue turn down a street like Merrick blvd and turn left onto Linden blvd ending at the Cross Island
Or
Have the A or extended C continue to the Van Wyck turn south along the Van Wyck onto linden blvd and continue out to the cross island parkway
Me and my MTA friends have always thought about this idea. It's just that the C train does not have a good train fleet (from what in told 16 trains) so it would not make sense to extend it because it would worsen the gaps on the C. (Mind you the C gaps on CPW local are already terrible as it is).
More trains need to be added to the C regardless if it is extended or not. The B needs to run during the weekends. I do agree that C should run to Lefferts
@@sylonisupport68 absolutely
@@sylonisupport68 Agreed man.
I think this is a perfect idea. I was thinking about this before this video was posted. I think the c train should go to Lefferts. The A train should go to mott avenue full time as it currently does and have an extension to rockaway park beach as a rush hour extension as it currently does just so that the A train doesn’t need to have 3 terminals in queens
I’m all for any subway expansion in Queens.
I'm glad you are!
YES! There’s legit no problem with it. The late night stuff would be the same as it is now
I think C train to Lefferts could be a great idea, but it would take away one seat rides from express trains but it wouldn't hurt just to transfer 3 stops after lefferts. It would also improve the A's headways in rockaways and I think it would be also be cool if the C would also go to neighborhoods like Queens Village, Bellrose, Floral Park or even as far as Rosedale, plus the rockaway beach branch should be reactivated with H trains from 74 st Broadway and rockaways, and even make the superbypass line with a new service that connects to the rockaways between as well from 21 st queensbridge via the LIRR to the former branch, stopping at Rego Park and Woodside along the way, then running express along the rockaway beach branch from rego Park and Howard Beach JFK
He is not supportive of simply extending the C to Lefferts with no infrastructure changes. The plans he discussed is either rebuilding the line to four tracks or replacing the Liberty Elevated with the subway on Pitkin and Linden Blvd serving the same areas.
I would not get rid of the elevated at all. The E can go to Queens Village
The overpass can be for a new H train
Absolutely...This very topic is near and dear to my heart since the IND Fulton line has been my home line since I was born. I asked my uncle, who was a line coordinator at for the MTA in the 90s, this very question. He told me at that time, the C train was too long, and ineffective because back then the C was running all four boroughs when they decided to truncate the C to Euclid Avenue. Full disclosure, I was born in 1980
Yup. Running a line from the Bronx to Queens, as a full local, just is not a good idea.
@@MysticTransit I thoroughly enjoy the content that you put out. I'm huge fan of our Transit system despite some of the random decisions that is made by the authoritarians both past and present. The ideas that you bring in the forum are exactly the changes our system needs. For example, just my personal opinion, I think the BMT Jamaica line should be a four track trunk line down Broadway and Jamaica Avenue. What are your thoughts?
4 boroughs?!? I need to count this...
@@coolboss999 yes the NYC subway system only operates in Brooklyn, Queens, Manhattan and the Bronx. Staten Island has its own Railway that is part of the MTA
@@christopherglover3829 Yeah ik I live in NYC lol 🤣. I was talking about the C train. I didn't know it went through all 4 boroughs. I thought it only went through 3. Wait nvm it does 💀.
6:47 best operator ever, i legit thought he was gonna tell you to stop. and btw i agree with the C being extended to lefferts
Edit: who did he cuss out lol?
Uhhhh any sort of El constuction would be far cheaper than digging underground trying to secure permits. Austrailia has built els in Melbourne in matter of months. Philadelphia actually once had the option to extend it Market St Subway to replace it's aging El. We instead chose to built a new el while knocking the old one down at the same time and running train while doing it. Just a thought.
Frankly with the headways the C has, it wouldn't be the end of world to merge it with A after Euclid plus it a bit easier to have a cross-platform transfer there, than at Rockaway Blvd. This also opens the door for 24 Hour C Train service because the C could replace the Lefferts Shuttle.
A cool idea for a future video would be to summarize each of the failed NYC subway expansion projects for casual viewers, and explain why they failed/what caused their failure. (Staten Island Tunnel is one that comes to mind). There's a good list on Wikipedia
As much as I love the Transit Museum, one of the things that I wish would’ve happened instead of the museum was a separate line that ran from Hoyt to Euclid, that way the A and C could run together with the C going to Lefferts. Then again though, I’m honestly not sure if that would’ve even helped
It's an idea that has been around a long time. Having the (C)harlie go to Lefferts would make the most sense.
@Versatile Wolf NWO Really? Interlining already hurts headways already and adding more will make things worse. Plus interlining doesn’t have to happen at all. Look at the map I made of resulting services after two proposals (made my me) are implemented.
@Versatile Wolf NWO facts he makes ideas that makes no sence to me, but his vids are good either way
@@TransitD3V34 How do they make no sense?
@@TransitD3V34 It makes a lot of sense. A bottleneck at Euclid would make it even worse. If you wanted express service to Manhattan, that mean you would either have to get off at Rockaway Blvd or Euclid to wait for an A train
I myself just realized the difference between rockaway Park, rockaway Beach and far rockaway. I actually need to watch your video on it and some more research on the branch to get a better histórical context and to see how best to serve that area.
From my standpoint it makes sense to
Extend the C to Lafferts so that it has a dedicated line as opposed to every other A(I think). It also simplifies operations as the late night A shuttle can be merged into the C's fleet. You raise some salient points in your vídeo, though, that are worthy of consideration.
Re. The extension to cambria heights, this could possibly be the reason for the creation of the new Q51 SBS route proposed in the bus redesign plan. It's possible that if this route is successful, they might pursue a subway extension to that area. This would be very fitting.
As for going further into long Island, that's a no. We have LIRR for that.
That makes a lot of sense. They should extend the E to Euclid Avenue during rush hours also
That would be a bigger headache for riders on the E route.
Yeah, canal-hort only has two tracks.
@@TheRailLeaguer Agreed. The E doesn't need to touch Brooklyn. At all.
@@CaseysTrains Not with current trackage but I do have a map that does show E trains replacing train service over the Williamsburg Bridge.
no no no no no why tf does the e need to touch brooklyn for. that make 0 sence
That exchange at the end was hilarious and explains why trains are frequently late.
Can we first fix the problem that both lines run with railroad level frequencies. It's not abnormal to wait 15 or even 20+ minutes for either one of these trains.
YES! I'd make the C a 24/7 line. Late night A service would be the Rockaway round robin shuttle. This can be done without any changes to the current physical plant. In fact, it was done YEARS ago. Late night C trains would be extended to 207th Street.
That would be impractical for all Queens riders, especially that round robin service you propose re-implementing.
IMO, the (C) should definitely be a 24/7 Line, to allow the (A) to run exp Late Nights on CPW & IND Fulton (just because it is an extremely long local line).
I don't think the (C) should be extended to 207 St though, mainly to avoid any merging issues with the (A).
@@MysticTransit So let me see if I understand you. You are okay with "merging issues" between the A and C trains from Hoyt Street to Canal Street via the Cranberry Tunnel. You are okay with "merging issues" between the A and C trains using the old BRT/BMT era elevated tracks to Lefferts Blvd. - and/or the Rockaways - but, but you are not okay with such "merging issues" with A and C trains traveling to and from Inwood, even though many of the C trains are stored at the 207th Street train yard. Okay, now I understand.
@@MysticTransit Proposal 1. C trains run all times between Euclid Ave, Brooklyn to Lefferts Blvd, Queens during overnight hours (resulting in the Late-Night Lefferts Blvd shuttle to be eliminated).
Proposal 2. Rush hour C train service to Lefferts Blvd like W train to Gravesend 86 street in Brooklyn.
Proposal 3. Permanent extension to Lefferts Blvd all times except overnight. Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park- Beach 116th street bound A trains would have to skip 80th street and 88th street in Queens.
Proposal 4. New Infrastructure would need to be built. Possibly by reviving the H train to serve this new line. With the new R211A and R211T arriving and be pressed into service later this year, this could be a step in the right direction. Or extending the E train beyond World Trade Center, even though it would be too much for one line going into Brooklyn and Queens.
Proposal 5. Modify the existing IND Fulton Street Line north of Euclid Ave, by reconstructing Rockaway Blvd, In this scenario A and/or C trains would stop at 80th and 88th street. The R211's would be used as the main fleet for both A and C trains.
I've been saying this for the longest so the A would have 1 terminal to tackle then 2. Late night A could go back to lefferts as a shuttle like it is normally but I sipped extending the C
Love the bonus footage of the tower ops chatter at the end!!
Yeah, I thought it would be interesting to include that in the video.
Actually made a mistake it's actually 74th Street Broadway the other name for Roosevelt Avenue Jackson Heights. Speaking of the elevated section there was a 1929 extension plan
Back in the day until the mid 90’s, the ‘C’ train was extended as far as Rockaway Park - B 116 St.
Euclid Ave is another terminus and that’s because east of Euclid Ave is the ENY Yard so it made a lot of sense to allow the ‘C’ trains to end in Euclid Ave and head to ENY Yard for turnovers and maintenance.
I can see the ‘H’ making a comeback as a late night service serving the Rockaways via Howard Beach -JFK Airport and Euclid Ave since ENY Yard is nearby. The ‘A’ train has always provided service to Lefferts Blvd and I don’t see how that’s going to improve service by swapping the ‘A’ with the ‘C’ to Lefferts Blvd.
Overnight A service is fine as it is now, with A trains serving Far Rockaway and shuttles serving Rockaway Park and Lefferts Blvd. Bringing back the H won’t help that at all.
@@TheRailLeaguer the ‘A’ has always served full time between Lefferts Blvd and Euclid Ave full term. The old ‘H’ used to terminate at Euclid Ave, then head to Rockaway Blvd, traveled between Howard Beach - JFK and Broad Channel, then turned west to B 116 St Rockaway Park and then traveled east to Far Rockaway - Mott Ave, and finally went north through Broad Channel, JFK, and Rockaway Blvd to Euclid Ave.
All I can say was that the ‘H’ was an interesting line and the ‘H’ was named after the Hammels Wye in the Rockaways. It would be nostalgic if the ‘H’ was brought back to service either to Euclid Ave or at the very least to Howard Beach - JFK.
@@wanderer34 There’s really no need. In fact, there’s literally no logic of bringing back an old device pattern just for the sake of nostalgia.
@@TheRailLeaguer The A has always served Lefferts Blvd and Far Rockaway while Rockaway Park - B 116 St used to served by the C. The H served either between Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park and went up north to either Broad Channel, Howard Beach - JFK, or all the way to Euclid Ave in Brooklyn. I’d bring back the H just to serve the Rockaways alone and maybe end it at either Broad Channel or Howard Beach.
There’s really no need to have three termini for the A train in Queens and NYC already has two S trains (the 42nd St Shuttle in Manhattan and the Franklin Ave Shuttle in Brooklyn) and bringing back the H would mean that there’s a distinctive line specifically for the Rockaways if the H can’t be extended all the way to Euclid Ave. It’s not just for nostalgia, it’s also to make the system more functional and more utilitarian!
@@wanderer34 Your plan would do nothing to make the system more functional and utilitarian, as what we have now is pretty fine. Having three shuttles is not really the issue, especially as almost nobody calls the shuttles the S train. We really need to stop proposing bringing back old designations or routings for the sake of doing so. At least when I proposing bringing back some old designations, it’s for an actual worthwhile purpose.
Perhaps you should ride the subway more before you come up with nonsense proposals like what you come up with.
I think the (A) should only have one southern terminal, so that would be the Far Rockaway Loop. The IND Rockaway Line would also have a new station, Hamilton Beach, located between 163rd Drive & 164th Road. The (A) would also get extended past Mott Avenue, immediately turning right onto Mott Avenue, continuing onto Beach 13th Street, then turning right onto Seagirt Boulevard, eventually merging back onto existing line just after Beach 36th Street, forming a loop. The new stations would be, Gateway Boulevard, Plainview Avenue, Beach 17th Street, Beach 26th Street, & the southern portion of Beach 36th Street, just before merging with the existing tracks.
Extending the C to Lefferts would be great for short term. But what we really need is the QueensLink to get activated.
My idea was to extend the R to the Rockaways via QueensLink but terminate the R at City Hall lower level and extend the W to Bay Ridge. Or build a new connection so that the E could go to Bay Ridge
Queens link can be a part of the original plan for 63rd street line via unused LIRR tracks or queens blvd at k😊ew gardens
Yes it makes more sense to extend the C line to Lefferts. Hell it can be a late night shuttle. From Euclid Avenue to Lefferts Blvd.
Since I've went to Transit Tech High School I've rarely seen the A/C having issues merging with one another tbh. I don't think the interlining would be as big as an issue as people make it out to be. Plus CBTC will eventually be added onto the Fulton St Line. Scheduling would just have to be slightly modified and reconstructing the interlocking just after Euclid and after Rockaway Blvd
Oh there is definitely issues and even CBTC won’t fix this. Interlining is already is big issue systemwide and the last thing we need is to add more.
As a former Transit Tech Student (2021 Graduate here) I’d suggest you study the A and C line more, cause the merge points do get bad during the rush hours at Canal Street and Hoyt-Schemerhorn. My personal suggestion for sending the C to Lefferts to to build either a SAS-Fulton Connection or a Whitehall-Fulton Connection so that a local service wether SAS or Broadway can boot the C to the Express. This not only allows you to send the C Express, but also allows you to increase the Fulton Line’s capacity by 50%
plenty a morning I've been on a paused A train at Layfette waiting for the C train to cross ahead for Hoyt Sch
Mystic I liked the fact that instead of you saying Doesn't you said Does Not. I like that, Respect my brother.
Absolutely!! It should have been a long damn time ago!! Or at least to Rockway Blvd or JFK!! Also 10 cars instead of 8 on new cars made like 32's.
No, not without Pitkin Avenue extension. Interlining at Euclid Avenue, as there is no over-run at Lefferts, and limited deadheading to Pitkin Avenue.
Better to extend the Fulton Line to Cambria Heights. Send C to Cambria Heights, send all A to Rockaways, send T line to Lefferts Blvd (plus A to Lefferts Blvd during rush hours). T would connect to Fulton Line at Schermerhorn Street and run local to Lefferts.
During rush hours, C runs express to Euclid Avenue in peak direction with supplemental Diamond local to/from Euclid Avenue during rush hours in peak direction. V would run to/from Houston Street during rush hours.
I love this channel!
I'm glad you do!
I never really cared about the C train line, but I think it would be cool if it did go to Lefferts boulevard
imo:
A: Far Rockaway to Inwood
C: Lefferts to 168 (express in Brooklyn)
E: Euclid to Jamaica
H: Rockaway Park to Euclid
The E doesn’t need to be extended
E to Euclid is a very bad idea bc the A/C already merge at Canal St which causes a lot of delays adding the E to Euclid via the Cranberry tunnel will make things worse. Cranberry St tunnel cannot handle 3 lines.
@@iNevaanIt will be another 60th st tube situation, where every train through are capped with horrible frequencies on their lone portions.
I think it’s a good idea also sends more A train to far rockaway
Keep up the amazing work!!😎 You have my like and sub👍👍😀. Looking forward to more great footage.
Thanks for the sub!
You only need to redesign the interlocking between Grant Avenue and Euclid. No need to replace any lines or have trains go from Jackson Heights to do this. Just have the C go to Lefferts and the A go to Far Rockaway alone.
Here’s a idea I got to extend the (C) to lefferts blvd without causing much inconvenience and creating more merge zones. Extend the (W) to Brooklyn and then build a new crossover between court street and Hoyt street. The (W) runs local to Euclid Avenue and the (C) is moved to the express tracks and is extended to Lefferts Blvd and expanded to 10 cars. All (A) are diverted to far rockway and some rush hour train to rockway park. The (W) is weekdays only so
weekends
(W) no service use (C)(N)(R)
(C) local in Brooklyn shorts turns Euclid Avenue
(A) also goes to lefferts blvd
Late nights
(C) no service use (A)
(W) no service use (A)(N)
(A) Fully local all diverted to far rockway. (lefferts shuttle)
The (T) is a much better option to go to Fulton street line. So once phase 4 is finished a new tunnel will be build bring 2nd Avenue trains to Euclid Avenue.
(A)(C)(W) short term
(A)(C)(T) long term
The (T) would use the court street museum to connect to Fulton street line and run to Euclid Avenue via Fulton street local.
late nights
(A) local
(C) shuttle bettween Euclid Avenue and lefferts blvd
(T) only runs to Hoyt Street
weekends
(C) local in Brooklyn shorts turns Euclid Avenue
(A) also goes to lefferts blvd
(T) only runs to Hoyt Street
I’ve actually taken a C train that went to lefferts. It was an R32 C train that gap filled for the delay in A service. Then they turned the C train back to a Euclid on the return trip.
So it possible
@@BehindTheMaskMJalways been possible
I would love to see the C extended to the Lefferts though logistically I have no idea how to improve the trackage. The area between Euclid and Grant looks so complicated. I'm all for extending the four tracks along Pitkin Ave but still keeping the elevated portion. Or maybe reconfiguring the switches and keeping the C along the elevated to Lefferts. I want to see more A train service to the Rockaways. Especially to Rockaway Park which barely sees any.
Reconfiguring the switches will still not solve the problem of more interlining, which is a handicap on train schedules.
One solution I have proposed is disconnecting the Fulton Street Local tracks and transferring the service to local stations to other lines such as the Broadway Line.
NYC Transit probably wishes Rockaway Blvd was an express stop so they could run a shuttle service between Lefferts and Rockaway Blvd.
Heres a thought: if the full second Avenue subway ever gets built, maybe connect it with the Fulton street line with a new tunnel that would link up to the current transit museum station. The (T) line would run local along Fulton street while the (A)(C) handle express service (The C line would be lengthened to 10 cars). The (T) would terminate at Euclid Avenue while the (A)(C) continue into Queens with the (C) train running to Lefferts Blvd and all (A) trains going to the Rockaways.
See if you can find the 1929 "Second System" proposal. Part of it deals with what you've discussed on the Fulton Street Line, service to the Rockaways, etc. Yes, there is an unused stub terminal at Roosevelt Avenue that was supposed to be the terminal for Rockaway trains. There are also unused fly-overs that were supposed to carry through trains to the Rockaways.
I think the R train should go from 95th St., Brooklyn to Ditmars Avenue in Astoria queens the way used to be and the N train from 71st and continental to Coney Island the way that used to be and the G train from 71st continental to Coney Island Instead of just Smith and ninth Street like it used to be extend all the way out to Coney Island
I like this idea of the C train going into Queens Lefferts Blvd so that all A trains can go to the Rockaways and have that one seat ride to JFK and the Rockaways, but like you said it cause it to interline with A. Probably in the distant future we could see the 2nd Ave Line connection with Fulton St Line so A & C trains can handle the express while the 2nd Ave trains can handle the local stop. That’s the only possibility I can see the C going to Lefferts but it would still interline at Rockaway Blvd going into Manhattan, but the Eastern Queens extension is probably better as well.
Yes, I'm all for it or if they can't do it rename the (K) to Lefforts Blvd. Instead.
Imho it makes sense. In order for the C train to extend into Lefferts Blvd. The A train would have extended to its original line by going to Mott Avenue in the Rockaways and have the A train extended on Rosh hours going to Rockaway Park. Due to its community opposition I would say it's a good idea to have the C train extended to Lefferts Blvd
They should extend the train to Rockaway Park during rush hour was like it used to be. That way nobody has to sit at Broad Channel or get off at Euclid avenue
That won’t work well for all riders since service would be slower and infrequent.
It really should. Number 1 because it would make the A line less confusing and 2 on late nights it can be a shuttle form Euclid to lefferts blvd instead of that weird A shuttle.
I never understood why the A train going to Queens has 3 different terminals. I agree, have the C trains go to Lefferts and have all the A trains go to the Rockaways so u wouldn't have those long waiting times especially on weekends!
The C train was extended to the rockaways ( green birds) until the mid 90’s had the MTA Kept this up service would be way faster
Love the bit at the end
I’m all for the C to Lefferts but you’re right, that would create delays due to interlining between Euclid and Rockaway Blvd. Maybe they can have the A do skip stops in that area like they do on the J line. If construction were an option, extend the lefferts blvd stop to sutphin but from the other end and that can create additional access to the air train. As far as extending service to Cambria heights, let the E or J train do that. Cambria is the perfect area since there is no Lirr stop over there
Why can’t the only go to Far Rockaway. Have the C go to Lefferts and only have the shuttle go to Rockaway Park
Lay tracks across the Verazanno bridge and make the SIRR part of the subway system!
Here my plans
•Extension The C train to Lefferts Blvd
•Having all A train to the Rockaway by running express between Grant ave and Broad channel
Yes the (C) should be extended to Lefferts Boulevard and the (A) handle The Rockaway's
2 rt trips btw LEF -168 st is a great idea. Let the A go to FAR and ROC. 20 min headways on the A to the Rock is ridiculous.
I got an idea, construct an tunnel between Court Street (Transit Museum) and White Hall street. (E) and (K) trains would run to Euclid Av and (C) trains would run on the express tracks to Lefferts. A second Av Subway service or two would replace the (E)(K) in south Brooklyn using Nassau, (J) trains would be cut back to da chambers.
The C train should go to Lefferts Boulevard and just make the a train go to the rockaways because years before the C train used to go all the way from Bedford Park Boulevard in the Bronx to Rockaway Park all local stops the C train used to be the Rockaway Park train back in the 80s and 90sThere’s no reason that the C train cannot be extended to Lefferts Boulevard or they can just put it back the way it was and send the C train to Rockaway Park
Dude i thought the same thing i just wondered why they couldn't have the C train go to Lefferts Blvd. and have the A train go too far rockaway.
That could be possible, terminate at lefferts Blvd all times while retaining 168 street all times except for nights where it can be scale down to a shuttle at Euclid avenue but in terms of operating in peak hours, it can only utilize a headways of six minutes which is 10 tph enable the A train to shift to far Rockaway and if the queens link can happen in connecting the queens Blvd line to the Rockaways, the M train can serve Rockaway park
You can still do that plan easily and if you factor the A and C being express in Both 8th Ave and CPW then having all C Trains end at Lefferts can happen. For that to happen you have to send the D on the Local tracks on CPW. I also had the plan to swap the C and D northern terminus, so that the C can have more capacity to accommodate the service to Lefferts Blvd.
NYC Subway looks very big and complicated. I'm sure it's not if you use it daily but I'd probably get lost more than once!
I think the merging issue is mainly because trains merge BEFORE making stops. ACE Canel St does not experience (at least not serious) delay because trains there merge after stops. C going to Lefferts Blvd will merge after stopping at Euclid Av
That’s is true unless if you do the A and C on CPW and 8th Ave Express than yeah definitely you can do that as the amount of merging would be better timed after Euclid. Bear in mind that the A and C would run at 10tph each.
An H serving the route from Far Rockway to Roosevelt Ave could also possibly have the benefit of supplying an additional "3rd ring" circumferential line between Queens and East New York, with the G and the IBX serving as the inner two rings. Given how it seems the MTA is beginning to look into improving inter-borough connections between Brooklyn and Queens, could be a serious contender for a future project... assuming phase 3 SAS doesn't come to life to eat into the MTA's budget
Anything to help extend subway service I'm all in for. The problem is if America and NYC heavily invested into mass transit any project would not be a discussion it will be a solution to the problem and make nyc subway more accessible to everyone who lives works and plays here.
I’d say this is the most feasible idea
(personally always it’s better if we wait for CBTC on the Fulton line)
Basically they would have to do convert all A trains that were destined to Lefferts Boulevard into C trains (10 cars please), rearrange the schedule so local C and Express A don’t have back ups (somewhat similar to the 2/5 trains at Jackson avenue during rush hour)
Then at night you can designate C trains as shuttle.
Personally there should be a H train but I’d use it for Rush Hours
Basically the whole goal is to make the “A” train have one destination and not 3.
6:47 man that T.O got his wish granted
The (C) needs to be extended to the rockaways as it was extended before as a green bird train
This makes a lot of sense.
that A train operator has anger issues....
When I grew up in NYC back in the 70s, the C ran to Rockaway Park, and the A ran to Either Lefferts Or Far Rockaway. So i dont see why the system would need to be modified that much.
It makes perfect sense. I’m not a fan of one train having 2 or 3 different last stops. I’m sure the locals who live in the area are used to it but someone going someplace on the line can easily screw up
I definitely agree with that
JFK to LaGuardia link 👀
Mystic We have shuttles, The Manhattan Shuttle, The Brooklyn Shuttle, And The Rockaways Shuttle, We Do Not Need The C to Extend.
My transit dream idea would be to have the F & G moved to a lower level at Hoyt and Jay St stations. Make the A & C take over the current F & G platforms at those stations. Turn high street into a local station.Then the have a new set of tunnels for the local lines under the river parallel to the cranberry tunnels. Stop at Fulton either side platforms or below the current platform. Connect to either the current E terminating platforms or the provisions for local connections south of Canal St. This would atleast fix the bottle neck at Hoyt St then. Then maybe extend the E to lefferts or the C to Lefferts.
The previous setup is actually better than the C going to Lefferts. Before the C was short turned at Euclid, it went all the way to Rockaway Park during rush hours and middays. It can easily take that on again, plus weekends, so that the Rockaway Park Shuttle can become a late nights only shuttle. Not to mention it would bring back through service from Rockaway Park into Brooklyn and Manhattan.
The previous setup wasn’t ideal for Queens and Brooklyn riders since it created an already slower service than the A train to Far Rockaway. There’s a reason why the 1992 service changes were implemented.
One suggestion that I haven’t seen suggested is to build a tunnel coming from Whitehall Street (as there are bell mouths south of that station) to connect with the Fulton Street Line. (SAS is still a bit ways off) but that would not only improve IND/BMT Connections but increase Fulton Street Capacity by 50%.
I actually have proposed something like that.
@@TheRailLeaguer I remember
When I read the caption in the thumbnail I first thought, _They're going to extend the Beacon Street Branch of the MBTA Green Line to Lefferts Boulevard? And where is this Lefferts Boulevard in greater Boston?_
Maybe we will FINALLY see the 76 station!!!!🤔
I 100% agree on extending the C to lefferts. It never made sense to me on the A having 3 terminals especially when it doesnt help that there are people who dont read signs or hear the announcements if they're heading to the Rockaways. Reconfiguring the line past Euclid to have 4 tracks is probably best in my opinion. Even tho it'll probably cause heavy disruptions, it'll be worth it in the end. 1 less terminal for the A. And as for Rockaway Park, instead of the H terminating at LaGuardia Airport, why not try terminating elsewhere in Queens, or somewhere in the Bronx, or possibly even Long Island if the LaGuardia extension on the N/W doesn't happen?
What about the E line to Coney Island or far Rockaway the line was never outside
The E used to run into the Rockaways, it was cut back because it was far too long to maintain reasonable headway. Additionally, there' just no good reason to send it into the Rockaways, the A was just far better suited for the routing than the E.
As far as other changes I think the E train should be extended into Brooklyn on the Fulton line going to Euclid Avenue as another idea that will give accessibility into Brooklyn
Yes. Yes it should. It makes no sense for the A to have not 1, not 2, but 3 terminals. Not to mention that it is really awkward how the C is completely sandwiched by the A as it never really splits off from that line. It used to split off from the A when it ran along Grand Concourse with the D up to Bedford Park Boulevard during rush hours in the 1990’s, but it sadly got cut back.
The C definitely needs its own terminus, and the MTA should look no further than to have it replace the A at Lefferts.
I think the L should be demolished southeast of morgan avenue and instead go to wilson av/melrose st, then central av (with the m) then kosciuszko street (j) and then run on utica/malcom x av, with stops at putnam st, fulton (a, c), prospect place, crown heights - utica av (3, 4), East NY av, winthrop av, snyder av, foster av, glenwood rd (which could have a connection to the planned IBX), avenue j, avenue n and then Avenue U - Kings plaza. a 2 or 5 extension to kings plaza coupled with this would be a good connection if it had stops at avenue j, flatlands av, avenue r, and avenue u - kings plaza.
You should have offered to be the conductor! You seem like you know how too
If this ever happens the C should get more trains to run because all of it is local and it’s long or they switch the A with the C at 59 street Columbus circle and C go exp so they keep the same amount of trains running and they should change the time on rush hour for the A and C so they don’t arrive together at Euclid Ave so there’s no cause for delays where there going to intesect. Maybe each train should be 6 to 3 mins each stop away and when it’s not rush hour it can be like 8 to 5 mins each train passing Euclid and when it’s midnight it can terminate at Euclid Ave
I’ve stated this before and still do, the C train need to be extended to Lefferts Blvd. Now the A trains run more than the C, the A trains can use track 3 (middle track L) that leads outside and go express from there to Far Rockaway. And coming back from Far Rockaway use the local track until it reach Euclid Ave. Now, the issue is late nights, because the C don’t run overnight.
The line going across the border is only two tracks so that won’t work as well as you think.
The e train should go to lefferts blvd Avenue on the express tracks the entire length of the route and use the middle track in queens,during rush hours only and the e is express in one direction.
YES FOR THE LOVE OF GOD YESSS
I think the (C) train should not only be extended to Ozone Park-Lefferts Boulevard, but it should also be extended to Freeport-Mill Road. The (C) would continue past Lefferts Boulevard, & stop at 126th Street, 132nd Street, Princeton Street, Tuckerton Street, 105th Avenue, 109th Avenue, Linden Boulevard, Roy Wilkins Park-Foch Boulevard, Baisley Boulevard, Farmers Boulevard, Springfield Boulevard, 224th Street, Francis Lewis Boulevard, Hook Creek Boulevard, Liberty Boulevard-Arlington Park, Clearstream Avenue, Benedict Avenue, Fletcher Avenue, Emerson Place, Marshall Avenue, Blake Avenue, Lynbrook Avenue, Sunrise Highway, Marion Place, Cumberland Street, Charing Cross Road, Rockwood Avenue, Milburn Avenue, Elm Place, South Main Street, & finally its terminal, Freeport-Mill Road. The elevated structure would get rebuilt into a four-track line continuing the existing tracks at Euclid Avenue, with the (A) skipping Grant Avenue, 80th Street, & 88th Street. The Rockaway Boulevard station would be express, serving the (A), (C), & (K) trains. The extension of the line past Lefferts Boulevard would eventually turn right onto Merrick Boulevard, merging with the (E) & (J) trains. The (E) train would surface above ground just after Jamaica Center just before their merge with the (C) train. The IND Merrick Line would ultimately continue above or nearby the same road until its terminal. The (E) would separate just before Blake Avenue, would separate just before Sunrise Highway, while the (C) train would also have their own separate platforms in a unique station, after separating from the IND Merrick Line, the (E) would turn onto Peninsula Boulevard, stopping at Hempstead Avenue, Tanglewood Road, Lakeview Avenue, Dorchester Road, Andover Road, Allen Road, & finally its terminal Stratford-Southern State Parkway. The (J) would continue onto the IND Jamaica Line, turning onto Hempstead Avenue, & then terminating. The (J) would be stopping at 131st Street, Queens Boulevard, Sutphin Boulevard, 160th Street, 168th Street, 175th Street, 182nd Street, Hollis Avenue, Carpenter Avenue, Francis Lewis Boulevard, 212th Street, Springfield Boulevard, Cross Island Parkway, Warwick Road, Elmont Road, Emporia Avenue, Landau Avenue, Doris Avenue, & finally its terminal Franklin Square-Court House Road. The (K) train would run alone on the IND Utopia Line, turning left onto 168th Street just after separating from the (C) train, then turn right onto Union Turnpike, & another left onto Utopia Parkway until finally terminating. The (K) would stop at Jamaica Avenue, Highland Avenue, Grand Central Parkway, 169th Street, 76th Avenue, 68th Avenue, Long Island Expressway-59th Avenue, 50th Avenue, 47th Avenue, Northern Boulevard, Crocheron Avenue, Francis Lewis Boulevard, 24th Avenue, 19th Avenue, & finally its terminal Bay Terrace-Willets Point Boulevard.
Can't believe that The (C) & (E) went to The Rockaways back then. Probably The Longest Routes in The System.
“*Just* construct the Rockaway Beach Branch” -dies inside
Just construct it. It would save so much trouble, and avoid us having to extend the subway, or reconstruct the current el.
If I gotta be honest I think the C should extend to Lefferts Blvd because it could clear the A train headways to Far Rockaway, but the MTA have to change the signals for the C do go to there. Other than that It would make sense for the C to go to Lefferts Blvd and the A just going to Far Rockaway-Mott Av instead of just the C to stay at Euclid Av and 2 A trains to Lefferts Blvd or Far Rockaway Mott Av
What should happen:
C gets extended to Ozone Park - Lefferts Blvd replacing the A in that direction. Meaning the A no longer goes there. Then the A would go express from Euclid Av to Rockaway Blvd and the C takes it places in the stops that were bypassed/skipped.
Yes, but the bottleneck at Euclid. It would cause massive delays
The C is local, there isn't 3 tracks for it to run, and would be the same skip stop problems like the J/Z you discussed
What if E - Euclid, C express thru Brooklyn to Lefferts Blvd & A Super Express on the F line from West 4th to Jay St ? Would help interlining between Grant St & Euclid?
It should be the E The E is the only train line that is only underground for a long period of time and homeless people use that as an excuse in the winter to stay on the trains primarily the E train because it’s underground all day
I don’t see what the problem is with extending the C train to Lefferts Boulevard they used to go all the way to Rockaway Park there was very little change that had to be made it simple the A-Train go express the same way they have been doing the only difference is that one is going to Far Rockaway and the Other is going to Rockaway Park this will provide full service to both those areas seven days a week 24 hours a day and then just have the C train just extend out to Lethbridge Boulevard in stead Euclid Avenue There’s really no big changes that need to be made the C train rides local every single day but just coming from Euclid Avenue if it goes to Lefferts Boulevard that’s just gotta provide even better service for all those areas in Queens
Extend the C to Lefferts, and A to only one Rockaway end, and reinstate the H. H can be the all-day Rockaway Shuttle. Rockaway Beach has Express Tracks. Make the A Express there! H can be local. All A's can be Full Express.
The C train doesn't really need to be "extended" per se. Back in the day it always ran all the way from Bedford Park to Beach 116th
That’s was a pretty long route that created nothing but complaints of slow service
Rush hour C trains used to come to Lefferts back in the early 1990s