Why the 7 is Great (and QBL isn't)
Vložit
- čas přidán 2. 03. 2024
- In this video, I will examine and explain why the 7 is almost universally beloved, and QBL isn't. Then I will propose a few solutions to improve QBL service.
Sources/Further Reading
sunnysidepost.com/straphanger...
new.mta.info/press-release/mt...
new.mta.info/article/mta-cust...
www.laguardiawagnerarchive.lag...
erausa.org/pdf/bulletin/2000s...
new.mta.info/agency/new-york-...
www.vanshnookenraggen.com/_in...
pedestrianobservations.com/20...
Pictures
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_A...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexingt...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/34th_St...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Times_S...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/42nd_St...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_C...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court_S...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackson...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/90th_St...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junctio...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/103rd_S...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/111th_S...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/111th_S...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J/Z_(Ne...
for all non-NYC people, QBL is the Queens Boulevard Line that has the E, F, M, and R trains and runs under (you guessed it) Queens Boulevard.
Also known as (part of) the IND. (The formal name being the Independent Subway System.)
I just thought it interesting seeing a video talking about why the 7 is so good without mentioning at all about how culturally and ethnically diverse it is. I love cultural and ethnic diversity but it was interesting seeing this purely from a transit perspective.
There is a great book, International Express, by Sephae Tonnelat and William Kornblum from 2017. Great read. Also City of Gods by Hanson which is about all the churches in Flushing.
One note on load distribution is that while QBL doesn't have any transfers to faster routes into Manhattan, QBL does provide multiple routes into Manhattan, all of which have far more stations in the CBD than the 7. Lots of people for example transfer from E trains to R trains at Queens Plaza, which does help with load balancing a bit.
It kind of piss me off that Jamaica 179th Street was well used back then but people made it downfall now
One of easiest ways to increase capacity at QBL, but politics is like, “Nah!”
@@shadowtoad95One of my main arguments on why transit should be privately operated while still being publically owned.
@@shadowtoad95 I miss the Redbirds R33WF and R36WF on the (7) line.
@@Hotters9060Same but we can’t have the same trains for so long, there’s gotta be some technological advancement in the trains. Soon enough we’re gonna be missing the 188’s on the 7
@@ViniBallonDor Also the R62 and the R62A trains are going to be replaced by the new R262 trains which will be similar to the R211's.
I've seen trains fly on Queens Blvd, but also experienced a terrible delay hold in the tunnel for 10-20 mins a few weeks back. For the 7, only experience some waiting before entering the tunnel to Main St.
The only problem is that the IRT Flushing Line has 3 tracks. I prefer a 4-track IRT Flushing Line along with many other rebuilds.
@@bennythepenny5831 It would make the 7 nearly perfect.
@@Urban_ManThanks for your support! 😉
Those delays tend to happen in the local tracks where the M and R trains terminate.
@@bennythepenny5831 There's not enough room to fit in the fourth track on IRT flushing line.
Did you forget that the 7 has no merges and switches with other lines? Let's not forget the whole line is automated. All they do is push a button for ATO. The Echo Fox and Romeo only have between Union Tpke and 7 Ave - 53 St enabled so you can't use ATO. Let's not even mention the Queens Plaza Junction.
"Deinterlining" refers to the no merges and switches with other lines which he explains in detail. Like you said, the 7 train has none of that, just one branch, peak direction express, which can be planned. Queens Plaza on QBL has the the M switching from local to express which he suggest getting rid of that by having the M run via 63rd.
He talks about the 7s merges which it does have when the 7 express goes local. Did you not watch the video?
I use the 53rd Street line every day now, and I gotta say when they swapped the F and M on the line, this line massively improved. I think there's a need to continue deinterlining and max out capacity at 179th St, but I have never had a bad time taking the current service alignment (but in Queens at midday going to Manhattan is a nightmare because of the midday 63 St work)
Love elevated trains like the 7! If people think trains, especially elevated trains like the 7, Chicago L, and Montreal REM, ruin neighborhoods, they should go ask all the people of The Bronx who live along the Cross-Bronx Expressway about their health and all the noise and air pollution. With it being elevated, you're saving money by not doing tunneling, while still achieving grade separation! And building elevated trains will still promote dense transit-oriented development, as shown here! Remember, when these stations in Queens along the line first opened, there was nothing! As more people become environmentally aware, on top of those who either can't afford a car or can't physically or mentally drive one, building dense transit-oriented development is an absolute must as we move forward and solve society's biggest problems.
I like what they did with the Court Square transfer, because it wasn't always a free transfer as they were once separate stations. Two transfer passageways were funded by Citigroup, the first in the 1980s between Queens Boulevard and the Crosstown Line, and the second in 2005 between the 7 and G when they were building Court Square Two. In 2001, it was temporarily an out-of-system transfer between the 7 and G to compensate for when the G was shortened to Court Square. And not to mention, I like how at 42nd St, the 7 is along the passageway between Times Square-42nd St and the Port Authority Bus Terminal, meaning even those who use the bus terminal like commuters from New Jersey can easily access it to get crosstown!
I love the 7 so much! Lots of people love this line. After all, Mets fans even call themselves the 7 Line Army! The best part about the 7 is all the diverse neighborhoods it connects like you mentioned. To put things into perspective, approximately 800 languages are spoken in NYC, with 300 spoken along Roosevelt Ave! Really shows that NYC is truly the international city! To me, learning another language is to have another perspective, another window from which to look at the world! That all these people, that speak so many different languages, from all walks of life, all take the train, it's a beautiful thing. The NYC Subway really is a fine example of a system built for the people, one that unifies the different social classes. The train is the universal language. It's what a transit system is meant to be. It is truly the backbone of the city.
Besides the diverse neighborhoods it serves, there are other reasons why it's called the International Express. It served the 1964-65 New York World's Fair, as well as serving the UN! Before moving to their current HQ, the UN once met at two locations on Long Island. One of those was within Flushing Meadows for the General Assembly at the NYC Building (now the Queens Museum) from 1946 to 1950. The other was Lake Success which was its temporary headquarters from 1947 to 1952. From the station, there were shuttle buses taking tourists and diplomats alike to Lake Success. The 7 was actually designated a Millennium Trail (which reflects important aspects of American history and culture) in 1999 by Hillary Clinton, acknowledging its role in redistributing immigrants in the early 1900s.
I studied Spanish for 7 and a half years in school. However I really got to speak it well after having lived in a Dominican neighborhood in Westchester County.
Then, I lived in Jackson Heights, and my Spanish with a Dominican accent changed to a Spanish with a Colombian accent.
In fact, living in Jackson Heights was like living in a Spanish-speaking country. This was helped by hearing Spanish all around me when I was in public, and by hanging out with Hispanic immigrants, by teaching English as a second language to Latin American immigrants at a local school, and by watching television programming on Telemundo and Univisión.
Once, when I went to see about a room being rented in a house in Woodhaven, the Colombian owner of the house thought that I was Colombian because of the way in which I spoke Spanish--and that I didn't speak Spanish with an English accent.
Tech Transit Association, you are my guy and my friend from now on because you are the very first person in the transit community to echo my sentiments about sending all of the local services to Jamaica-179th Street. You are indeed the real future of our transit system and with your ideas, you are going to take us into a brighter future. I am indeed so grateful and proud of you because you can clearly see what’s going on here and you are not an idiot like the other transit enthusiasts. You are my brother and I would love to share my thoughts and ideas with you in the future because you have a very huge platform and I am proud to be a part of it.
179th Street is the model last stop station to be honest. It was made to replace the mis-terminal 169th Street, which is good as a standard LCL station. Hopefully there are actual yards at Main Street like there should be in 34th Street-HY.
Also, I never got and still don't get, the universal favor for the 7 above the QBL.
The F train gets the most R160 train cars, search R160 NYC for Wikipedia.
It’s sad how 179th street isn’t being used to the fullest. A lot can probably be done if M/R could go there instead of just the F.
179th Street wasn't even supposed to be an Express station. It was built as a terminal station, because the funds was gone to extend it further.
Just to think about it, 179th does remind me of IRT 137th Street Broadway station terminal.
Whenever they run out of funds, they just build a terminal and hope they eventually extend it later.
I'm glad they decided to extend the Broadway IRT station. Otherwise, it would have ended up like 179th Street. A terminal with unlimited capacity that isn't being used.
Well. That kind of happened to the 137th Street terminal.
💡 Extend all the local services to 179th Street. Or at least the "M"
My favorite piece of 7 train trivia is from 1999, when John Rocker (horribly racist and bigoted MLB pitcher who was later shunned by the league) perfectly described it by accident during one of his hate-fueled rants:
“Imagine having to take the (number) 7 train to the ballpark, looking like you're (riding through) Beirut next to some kid with purple hair next to some queer with AIDS right next to some dude who just got out of jail for the fourth time right next to some 20-year old mom with four kids. It’s depressing.”
To John, this is a nightmare, but to New Yorkers, this is the beauty of the city. As it should be.
Meanwhile 1 of my countrymen was convincing us to be more grateful for our train system, by showing us a photo of NYC Subway's W4 station & claiming he'd heard no one complain about it
QBL has improved so much ever since the F and M swap. I only wish the MTA would keep this permanent. Now I don’t randomly see those 18 minute gaps in F trains.
The M operates into Manhattan during weekdays only (like the V before it) and unless you’re proposing having the M go into Manhattan at all times except for late nights, that argument goes out the window.
Honestly it would be better to have all 6th Avenue trains via the 63rd Street Line and all 8th Avenue Line trains via the 53rd Street Tunnel. Both the 8th and 6th Avenue trains get exclusive access to Queens Blvd and the R train is rerouted to Astoria-Ditmars (to mitigate concerns about yard access, R service will also be rerouted to Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue).
@@TheRailLeaguermake M full time and B
Finish the F line past 179th to Springfield Blvd as originally designed. E Train has tracks close to 1/2 mile past Jamaica Center and was intended to go from underground to Elevated in original plan.
The 7 train provides easy access from Manhattan to Queens, which is why it's the train I've been taking for most of my life. I really only take QBL if the 7 train is suspended in Manhattan, and the service is not the best. Great video!
I'm a bigtime train guy and the NYC subway is the largest in the world by far. I appreciate this type of content. Subbed.
Cool video, thank you! I do think your web search is a little tenuous as evidence, as most people don't know what QBL is, so it's not going to be in web results. Otherwise, I find your analysis really sound as usual! Looking forward to part two.
The 7 is simple just as the L, they are alone from the system. You cannot compare the 7 to QBL.
Oh yeah and they're the only lines that don't have multiple lines instead use its own tracks. The others are the Franklin Avenue and 42nd Street shuttles.
Having worked QBL as train crew and platform assistant, these changes are needed to clear up the delays and congestion on the QBL corridor. I have always advocated to extend the local trains to 179 St as a start to alleviate the congestion at CTL. The proposed extention of the E to Springfield Blvd was in the initial Archer Av plan but the budget cut won out to short line to Parsons. The addition of a Rockaway line from 63rd Dr would be a significant improvement for commuting from the Rockways to MNHTN as an alternative to the A C.
Honestly, the 7, 6, and E are the fastest trains in the outer boroughs, but QBL DOES suck. Not only is it slow on the M and R (I was once on an E local and IT SUCKED LIKE HELL.) BUT THE AMOUNT OF HOMELESS PEOPLE ON QBL IS CRAZY
2:24 I wonder with this diagram if it would be beneficial to just swapping the F and M and have the F go on 53rd with the E and the M go on 63rd with the Q, and then with the late night have the F serve those 63rd St stations with no coverage and then on the weekends have the B or M go up to 21st St-Queensbridge while the E and F go on 53rd together.
M go to Rockaway Park, then F and G go to 179th Street, then two 8th Avenue services being QBL Express to Floral Park and Laurelton would be a blessing.
I used to live near the 7 and still use it its good but it dose suffer from intense crowding but its still my favorite line a I remember when it has r62As
5:45 1 of the elevated terminus train stations in my country has this problem too, probably to save on building costs, as further from the station (which has an island platform), the train tracks are positioned closer to each other (as you don't have to accommodate a platform in-between them along that stretch), so building a switch there between the tracks doesn't require a bridge as long as compared to if the switch is located nearer to the station. This likely also meant though that when we upgraded the signalling system from ATC to CBTC, frequency along that stretch could be increased to only one train every 110s instead of 100s. However we're soon going to have trains use the switch over at the station's overrun tracks instead to turnaround, & lengthen the overrun tracks so that trains can enter them for turning around more quickly & safely. This will allow for trains to run closer to each other & thus at higher frequency
Actually if u take away the slow (E) in Manhattan and take away the homeless in queens, E train can complete with the (7) not that’s godly, (E) train is very underrated train
14:23 i like that idea, but it would be too expensive to make another track and platform at forest hills
I would like to bring up an idea that I feel that the MTA can do when it comes to rerouting E Trains via 63rd Street. I remember that there were moments that E Trains would get rerouted via the F Line and run via 63rd Street. But in this case, I personally think that the MTA should consider constructing a 3rd tunnel where it can provide connection to the 8th Avenue Line stopping at 59th Street - Columbus Circle after departing Lexington Avenue - 63rd Street. In this case, it could run between 21st Street - Queensbridge and Lexington Avenue - 63rd Street, and switch to the Q Track and continue all the way straight until reaching 59th Street - Columbus Circle where regular service to World Trade Center resumes upon reaching 50th Street stoping at the Upper Level. This could be another reroute so that way E Trains doesn’t have to be traveling all the way to 168th Street via the C Line.
A friend described their daily commute from Flushing to the City as being a constant stream of thinking "Bad touch! Bad touch! Bad touch!" (They were referring to the severe overcrowding with people literally packed in like sardines.)
0:21 two main subway lines? i will not stand for Astoria line erasure😭
I call it half of a subway line.
Unless it is extended to LaGuardia…
10:11 The Z train just minding its own business, then proceeds to catch a stray on an unrelated topic 😅
Only for it to be called "a joke"
It wasn't built that way in the beginning. The EF switched at 5 Ave and run all the way to Jam with out switching with one Lil switch at bwood. The G and R ran together so it wasn't much switching. GR ran local without switching and so Did the EF. They changed all the patterns which now caused all these delays but can be solved it switch F M lines into qns M via 63
I have mapped out four corridors that could use subway service in Eastern Queens:
-Hillside Avenue (Queens Blvd IND)
-Union Turnpike (Queens Blvd IND)
-Hoarce Harding (Fulton Street IND)
-Northern Blvd (Astoria BMT)
For the (7) train extension to College Point and Whitestone the line would operate under Main Street until Parsons Blvd where it would shift under 149th Street before shifting under 20th Avenue to College Point Blvd East of Main Street should have 5 tracks so that we can have default express service.
The first and last ones would be extensions of existing lines and can help kickstart expansion into outer borough neighborhoods. (Main Line with Queens Blvd) and having the Astoria Line serve the Northern Blvd corridor from there have the deinterlined (R) join the LIRR tracks near Northern Blvd extending the Astoria Line as far as Port Washington.
For Hoarce Harding Expy I had the Fulton Street Line serve that corridor the line would head along Cypress Hills St and then shift onto Copper Street and operate along Woodhaven Blvd for a bit before operating along Hoarce Harding to as far as Marathon Pkwy.
For a subway along Union Turnpike I would branch off from Queens Blvd east of Kew Gardens with the line being a two track elevated structure to Springfield Blvd with a new subway along Union Turnpike this would be a big boon to residents and riders along the Q27 and Q88 buses something that they can benefit on as well.
With a (7) train extension to Whitestone and College Point East of Main Street should have 5 tracks so we can have default express service with this you could have four tracks and have local trains short turn at 32nd Avenue and expresses would continue the full route to College Point 20th Ave (skipping Parsons Blvd and Northern Blvd). Now the caveat to that additional infrastructure on both existing lines are required for this to work, and I'm talking about double tracking the PW Line, quad tracking the Flushing Line east of Queensboro Plaza (which right now is an impossibility) for bi-directional express service, however a longer term range plan would go towards replacing the Astoria and Flushing Line elevated lines with quad track subways.
For Northern Blvd we're better off having the Astoria Line serve that corridor from there have the deinterlined (R) join the LIRR tracks near Northern Blvd extending the Astoria Line as far as Port Washington.
I moved upstate from Queens 15 years ago, but seeing how not much has changed regarding the subway lines in Queens, I can still talk on this.
1) The (7) and are completely de-interlined so, it is naturally going to perform better. Plus, Main Street-Flushing is not going to receive the volume of ridership Jamaica will as Northern Queens and the North Shore of Long Island are not feeding as many passengers.
2) Unless they build the extension of the (E) line to Springfield Gardens or Rosedale as the existing tracks beyond Jamaica Center are built far enough to make that happen, the biggest solution to the E train's issues is to let many weekday trains terminate at 179th Street. Instead of just having the 2 or 3 rush hour peak trains begin/terminate there, let there be regular service to/from that terminal to take load off the smaller terminal.
3) With more (E) trains to 179, this can give riders all day express service along Hillside Avenue and highly reduce the need to transfer at Union Tpke. The (R) train to 179 after Jamaica Center opened was shot down because riders along Hillside Avenue wanted 1 seat Express service. If (hypothetically) every 3rd (E) train went to 179, they have their 1 seat express service.
4) Forest Hills as a terminal with the amount of trains per hour is just something that has to be lived with. That is the only station that provides direct access to the Jamaica Yard without multiple switches and reverses. There is access from the Union Tpke station, but that was designed for out of service trains from Jamaica to access it.
Nice video yea the QBL sucks tbh and coming from a longtime Jamaica residents it always a mess especially on weekends I would try to stick with the J line tbh you should do a comparison the QBL with the J/Z line which is a lifeline for us in southeast queens and also the lirr. Also with the normal slowdown it has many connections when the lines split away from the line like the r and the unuse crosstown line connection leave at queens plaza the f goes to 63 street after 36 street the m leaves after 5 ave 53 street so that about it
The 7 does have its issues when trains enter service from the Corona Yard at 111th St. I have experienced many delays waiting for the train to cross in front of mine at 111th and depart.
In the 1970's and 1980's under different operating rules the #7 operated 33 trains per hour during the rush hours due to the tail tracks at the Times Square station allowing the quick entry and exit of trains. The train operators were already set in position to take out the next in coming train, and to keep the railroad running. Also the #7 trains were 11 cars long.
Excellent!
Can't wait for the next video.
My biggest problem with the 7 post-CBTC is that stations don't have enough exit access points. During the PM rush, you have to wait in line to get down the stairs, and that's not a huge deal (unless you're trying to transfer to an infrequent bus like the Q23…) - but if you're going against the flow and getting on a Main Street-bound 7 during the PM rush, you may miss a few trains. And, of course, you have to wait longer for those trains due to the local/express split, unless you're at Junction Blvd. It's still single-digit minute waits, but it sucks anyway when the one thing holding you back from making your train is that stampeding against the flow makes you a dangerous person.
Here's hoping they add exit-only stairs as they perform station reconstructions. For example, a 104 St exit at 103 St, and an 83 St exit at 82 St. I believe 111 St has an abandoned entrance/exit at 112 St as well. I have not been to Main Street since they added staircases, but I'd love to know what that's like now.
The 7 line has been extremely crowded and the solution to fight that should be adding more exits along with expanding the size of the stations on the Flushing Line. Also let’s consider the R262s to run on there too as that can allow the R188s to be moved elsewhere. That would allow more people to actually fit on to those trains, and open gangway trains such as the R262s are a good fit for the 7 line. The R188s can go to the 1 and 3 lines as a result of that the 7 would need at least 44 sets of R262s enough to supply the R262s for the 4 and 6 lines. And from there retain the R142s for the 2 and 5 lines.
@@Reformperson
If deinterlined under this scenario Flushing would get the R262's which would need 44 sets of R262's enough to supply for the deinterlined (4) and (5) while the R188's would be moved elsewhere which they could go to 240th Street and Westchester Yards for service on the (1) and (6) lines under this scenario the (2) and (3) would get R142's if deinterlined also under this scenario the R142's from the (4) would be sent to East 180th and 239th Street Yard for (2) and (3) service while the R142A's from the (4) would be sent back to the (6) if deinterlined under this scenario and this way each IRT Yard can remain maintaining one type of fleet
@@CR1Creative yup also I would expand the size of the very busy stations along with adding platform controllers on stations such as Roosevelt Ave and 149th St Grand Concourse. For Roosevelt Ave I would also expand the size of the platforms as well as that is a very busy station along with wider staircases and bigger Elevators.
@@Reformperson
However for the MTA that'll take money, time and energy to convert the R188's back into (10-car) R142A's and replace all the strip maps then you're going to have to convert the (5-car) R262's into "C" cars to make (11-car) trains meanwhile those reconverted R142A's would be transferred back to Westchester Yard for the (6) while Jerome Yards R142/A's would be transferred to 240th Street Yard for the (1) I could see this happen a few years after the R262's remain in service
@@Reformperson
Another good long term solution is to incorporate the A division into the B division with platforms shaved back to accommodate wider cars and install temporary moveable gap fillers in all of the A division cars then smoothen out some of the curves that are too sharp for B division trains next we would also need different route designations and then replace all current three-track elevated structures with brand new 4-track subways but that should be the last priority on the list
Mercy, I don’t know how those conductors and control people get through those merges. Thanks
Wasn't the whole reason to swap the F and the M to alleviate the massive overcrowding at 53rd & Lex when both the E and F ran there? Not sure we want to go back to that problem.
I’d also introduce service as a limited extension to Forest Hills-71st Avenue via Queens Boulevard local.
That doesn't make any sense because the E and M trains are highly imbalanced, with the E being crowded and the M not being crowded. This means that people are waiting for the next E train, not the next train, causing station congestion. Also this setup eats up capacity, as back then the E/F ran at 30 tph. Now it is down to 27 tph. By swapping the F and M, making the F go via 53rd, and the M via 63rd, this means that more trains can be run, decreasing congestion on the trains. Stations on 53rd St will see decreased crowds because people will take the first train that arrives, as opposed to waiting for the next E train.
@@techtransitassociation I also propose rerouting the (M) & (R) to the new IND Northern Boulevard Line. I already planned to assign the local service on the IND Queens Boulevard Line to the , (V), & .
@@techtransitassociationas a matter of fact how about we extended the m from metropolitan to up north In queens connecting the Woodhaven and junction Blvd stations that way people can not only change for the 7 but it can mean that we can put back g and r to 179th street and make the m go to whitestone or LGA Airport with well placed stops. You know so if any m rider needs to go to midtown they can use the r to get to midtown the orange m won't be needed. Then once it's all done the r would go on northern Blvd as alternate to the 7 we can also have Express service to Bayside and at Queens plaza connection to the 7,E,F,G and V trains. Yes the v now takes over for QBL via 63 while the f on 53,
V trains from Chruch Avenue to Rockaway Park via Queenslink.
M trains from Coney-Island/95th street(optional) to whitestone via myrtle Avenue, and 94th street
E trains from rosedale to Eculid Avenue Express in queens and Manhattan, local in Brooklyn
R trains from Little neck to Eculid Avenue via northern Blvd.
G trains would run from New hyde park to church Avenue local
F
QBL Express
Hillside Express
6th Avenue local
Culver semi Express.
It was a good move by the MTA. It kept the riders from transferring to the Express, as this was really the only option available via 53rd Street. Now at least riders can stay on the local without transferring at Queens Plaza.
And with the "F" no longer serving the 53rd Street corridor, passengers heading via 6th Avenue can have a safer ride.
If the"M" was to go there, it would become less useful. And because the "M" is not a 24/7 service, passengers would be forced to use other options.
This is not fair!
They already had to deal with various services like the "B", rerouted "Q" and even an extended JFK that they couldn't ride.
So keep everything the way it is.
Nice video. I also think that the R should be extended to 179th Street, allowing the E and F to run express east of 71st Avenue(except during overnight hours). We can then give the R an additional 70 cars(7 trains) to operate said extension. The cars are available, so no one can use that as an excuse.
In the event that Queenslink becomes reality, we can extend the M to the Rockaways and only terminate trains at 71st Avenue during service changes.
The R was the replacement for the E to 179th St when Jamaica Center was opened. Community opposition shut it down because Hillside Avenue riders wanted a 1 seat express ride to Manhattan. If the R is extended to 179, you are going to overcrowd Union Tpke-Kew Gardens as many riders are going to bail for the E or F...many riders already use that station to transfer amd have been doing so in the 35 years since Jamaica Center opened.
My plan of letting every 3rd E train begin/terminate at 179th Street alleviates some of the load that is on the improper Jamaica Center terminal, restores all day express service along Hillside Avenue and helps reduce crowding at Kew Gardens as Hillside Avenue riders have the option of the E or F.
@charlesingleton1213 It's a good plan, but the point is that 71st Avenue is a shitty terminal.
I don't think that Union Turnpike would be as bad as you claim since people would be able to switch from the R to the F at Parsons/Hillside, Union Turnpike, or 71st Avenue, or switch from the R to the E at the latter two stations.
By doing this all you would accomplish is the make the R worse than it is.
@@robertw.previdi5450 Idk how it would make the R worse since the cars are available to support said extension.
Nobody will ever put any rail down the spine of Rego Park and Forest Hill. It has been tried and tried. Too much NIMBY.
In the video at time index 15:20 in explaining the E to southeast Queens proposal, it's mentioned having a new yard in Gwen Ifill Park (previously known as Railroad Park). I don't see how that will happen. The park was under redesign and construction by the parks department which started in 2022 to be finished by 2026. But due to budget constraints work has been delayed to 2028. Don't see how a new yard would be made there, there will be probably community resistance.
Interesting ideas. I rode the 7 for the first half of my 54-life. The 7 is not without its problems. I wonder if the hour-long delays- always on a Tuesday- are still a thing? I don’t know why the interlocking at Archer Ave was placed 1200 feet from the station in the first place? I can only surmise it may be because correct placement would have created loading issues above - making it impossible. Or … chalk it up to being a government project. You decide.
I don't know if I'd call the 7 "fast" but I do love it.
Surely you haven’t taken the
@@aqua2poweros699 I have, it has its moments but "fast" is eh stretching it but I do love the line.
It seems like IRT lines often do better than IND lines, but is it always? I personally like the 7th Ave line more than the 8th Ave line, amid the express section on A/D from 59th to 125th
It is historical. The IRT lines have always been better. There is a different quicker pace which has been hard to instill in the B - Division. It can be done but the agency needs to stop being afraid to retrain the passengers. It was done at Grand Central with the Step Aside boxes. In the mid-90s we were down to 20 tph on the express track and pushed it back up to 27. But we did it with ads, platform conductors for a month, and announcements all supporting the effort. The MTA and every transit agency are too scared to talk to the riders and encourage them to hurry up and clear the doors.
My solution to fix QBL would be as follows:
1. Have the F run with the E on 53rd, and the M on 63rd. The R can continue to run on QBL during the weekdays, but on weekends when the W doesn’t run, the R will run with the N to Astoria-Ditmars Blvd, and the G will take its place on QBL (this would also mean extending the G to full 10-car trains). The M will also run on QBL at all times except late nights.
2. Have the M run via Queenslink, while the R (G on weekends) runs to Jamaica-179th Street. Woodhaven Boulevard can continue to operate as a local station, but new platforms can be added for the M as it diverges onto Queenslink. The R can be extended to Jamaica-179th Street, while the F may continue running along Hillside Avenue via a brand new extension, towards Glen Oaks.
3. Extend the E to Valley Stream. You mentioned extending to Springfield Boulevard, however why not go a tad-bit further? I believe that, after Springfield Boulevard, we can have the E go back underground, making one more stop at Rosedale, before terminating at the Green Acres Mall in Valley Stream. It would give passengers a one-seat ride from Jamaica Center to the mall via the Subway.
I think Rosedale Francis Lewis Blvd would be a good terminal for the E. From there have tail tracks that extend towards the Mall. With those tail tracks we build switches on both ends so we can have the turnaround capacity of Rosedale Francis Lewis Blvd at 30tph and extending the E there can allow it to run 18tph.
Other than that Rosedale Francis Lewis Blvd provides a connection to the LIRR and can be elevated too on its own track, and that is as far as we can extend the E line.
This is not a bad idea. I have my own nit picking, but I overall agree with this.
There are issues with this plan.
1. Your making the G and R alternate their terminals by weeday and weekends. Either have G to Jamaica- 179 and the R to Astoria-Ditmars or don't. It'll get people annoyed and confused at the same time.
2. Your making the M do the same thing except via 63rd and going into Queenslink. I don't have a issue with Queenslink but your not handling this issue with common sense.
I'm sorry doesn't matter how many times you want to stick around but it has to be split into 2 and both of them need to run all times. Sorry man but you can't go far what happens to the IND 63rd Street unused.
2.5. What in the name of world are you doing, your making the E go to Valley Stream - Green Acres Mall. That's going beyond and we don't know the demand for having more subway service there even if it;s to a mall. It's like your making the 2 and 5 head to Mount Vernon.
G to Jamaica 179 Street
R to Astoria-Ditmars Blvd
M from Myrtle Avenue to LGA(directly).
V to Rockway Park from church avenue.
I've no saying on the E it's for you to decide.
F to Jamaica 179(Express in Queens fully).
As an Elmhurst and Jackson Heights resident for the past 11 years, I rely a ton on both the QBL and the 7, so I love this video examining both lines!!
Does anybody here remember going to the World's Fair in 1964 and 1965, and seeing the cars on the #7 line being green?
I know the F has been running on the E line from Manhattan into Queens recently, which is probably one of the smartest things MTA has done (for once) but I don’t think that will be permanent
Mystic Transit is bullish on the idea that the MTA is secretly planning to make it permanent. He points to some of the platform signage being black whereas temporary signage is white usually. Once the 63rd Street work is wrapping up, he thinks they'll "send the M train as they get ready" and just end up keeping it that way.
I agree with all those points, I have suggestions that can improve QBL is deinterlining with the F and M lines which is just enough to meet the riders demand for now if more capacity is needed then we can have the F go back to 63rd St this time with the M, to replace the R, and the C would go to 179th St giving that line the most capacity.
Improving Terminals such as Forest Hills is a good idea as that has the potential to turn around 40tph but ending the locals at 179th St would be better as that can batter turn around trains. Having the M use QueensLink would just add more capacity which is needed and also add a one seat ride to JFK, and the Rockaways. Where riders can transfer the Airtrain as well as the deinterlined C Trains going on Fulton Lefferts or Far Rockaway.
The next terminal that gets me talking is Jamaica Center, as that is a terrible terminal to begin with. I think maybe making the switches like how it is at 34th St Hudson Yards would help beef up E Train Frequency, and also I like the Idea of extending it to Springfield Blvd but I feel like the E could get extended a bit farther to Rosedale Francis Lewis Blvd to transfer to LIRR cans can serve both Eastern Queens and Western Nassau Residents, and that also allows the E to serve the Green Acres Mall by having it within walking distance.
New Improved QBL as follows
C: To Jamaica 179th St
E: To Rosedale Francis Lewis Blvd
F: To Forest Hills 71st Ave (4th Track)
G: To Forest Hills 71st Ave (5th Track)
M: To Rockaway Pk (QueensLink)
Looking forward to the QBL video cause I have alot to say about QBL
You should do why Canarsie is great (and BMT Jamaica/Myrtle isn't)
Thats more one sided lol
QBL is better because its faster due to having 4 tracks. The E train flies through queens.
Outside of rush hours, sure I guess. But not when the express tracks are running 30-35 trains per hour in rush hours.
Yeah if you want to go to queens take the 7, it's just it's own line and is very impressive but those turns man stop making them sharp.
Among other things, what I would do is extend the subway all the way to the Queens-Nassau border.
1) Split the E into two branches, one continuing to 179 St, down Hillside Ave, ending at 268 St. The stops could be 188 St, Francis Lewis Blvd, Springfield Blvd (Queens Village), Bellrose Manor, Little Neck Parkway, and 268 St; the second branch would go past Jamaica Center down Merrick Blvd to Springfield Blvd in Laurelton. The stops there: Liberty Av, 108-109 Sts, Linden Blvd, Baisley Blvd, Farmers Blvd, and Springfield Blvd.
2) Extend the J/Z to Bellrose down Jamaica Av. The stops: 168 St, 179 Place, 188 St, Francis Lewis Blvd, Springfield Blvd, and Braddock Av.
3) Extend the 7 down Northern Blvd to Little Neck Pkwy. Local stops would be Crocheron Av, Utopia Pkwy, and Francis Lewis Blvd. The Express would bypass these up to Bell Blvd. From there, local to Douglaston and ending at Little Neck Pkwy.
While we're extending the 7, also bring it down to 14 St, and extend the L to 10 Av. The 7 can stop at 23 St - Chelsea Piers on the way.
6:21 what app/software is this ????
@tech transit association maybe if MTA converted Queensboro Plaza so the 7 train can ride into R line….
7 Is My Favorite Mta Subway Train
I laughed so hard when you said the Z train a joke 😂😂😂😂
The 7 line got allota b.s. with them so I don't know what you're talking about. And they need to extend the subway to the city line in Queens like they do in The Bronx. That means subway stations need to be built down Guy R. Brewer Blvd into South Jamaica, Springfield Gardens including the Brookville section along 147th Avenue leading into Rosedale terminating at Francis Lewis Blvd. Extend down Merrick Blvd and terminate at Hook Creek Blvd and the Conduit. Come on MTA....GET IT TOGETHER!
The seven is OK I don’t know if I would consider it the best. I prefer the IND lines because the trains are larger and usually newer.
Dekalb definitely deserves its own video 😅
One other random thought, which may require deinterlining DeKalb: at least on weekdays, have the R run express in Manhattan, and then via Brighton Express in Brooklyn to Brighton Beach.
Express trains on broadway are designed to go to 2nd ave
@@qjtvaddict Actually, there's a junction between 57th and 49th (and I think also one just north of 57th) that would allow an express train from Broadway to access the 60th Street tubes.
Bear in mind, the N ran to Forest Hills before the mid-80s.
as someone’s who’s home stop is on the 63rd St line, the M train wont be able to accommodate the amount of people as the M can’t run many trains because of the Jamaica line causing service to be less. Also this means that we will have no transfer until 74th St to catch an express train making everyone’s lives worse and doesn’t benefit everyone
"the M train wont be able to accommodate the amount of people as the M can’t run many trains "
The maximum service the M can run is 10 tph. With 8 car trains, that is 24,000 people per hour. According to MTA ridership data, 149,000 people pass through the 63rd St Tunnel everyday. With those numbers, the M train will serve that people in a little over 6 hours. So yes, the M does just fine on 63rd.
"Also this means that we will have no transfer until 74th St"
Very little people are going in the opposite direction. Most people are going to Manhattan.
"doesn’t benefit everyone"
I didn't say that. With transit planning, it is sliding scale and a game of trade offs. A change in scheduling will have negatives. The question is, will the positives be good enough to overcome the negatives. With the F/M swap, the answer is yes.
What are the political reasons for not extending QBL local service to 179th Street?
No political reason. Yard access. Remember, not much was in this area until QBL was built.
there is no 7 express train really in queens it SUCKS😭😭😭
Ik those reasons why QBL is the worst because some trains do merge a lot with the other line like the E, F, M & R and right especially at queens plaza and it cause many delays which is why the 7 is a much better service than the QBL
The 7 is packed during rush hour and Mets games …. The benefit of the 7 it the only train it’s line.
R188 vs R160??
The problem with Queens Blvd is Jamaica Yard. With all the trains laid up on D3 n D4 from Union Tpke to 169 and the layups at the bumper blocks at 179. Jamaica Yard needs to be expanded.
Very true though I do imagine that extensions of Queens Blvd and Archer Avenue Lines would include yard space either alongside or within a quarter mile of the lines.
It’s very easy and just use 179th as the terminal
I’ve never heard New Yorkers use QBL maybe people who are from Queens call it that but I’ve never heard people from Brooklyn, Manhattan, etc. use QBL
You cant compare a IND line to an IRT line, the even though the 7 is originally owned by BMT it still cant be compared to an IND line.
But I just did.
The 7 line don’t have as many stops like the other lines. Now the L is a good line too!
The 7 line is inconsistent. During weekdays, it’s fast and frequent. 9 out of 10 times, it’s a smooth ride. One small hiccup, however, results in a meltdown.
On weekends, the 7 train is almost always replaced by shuttle buses.
You forgotten the N/W the Astoria line the & J/M/Z
The astoria line is half a subway. It only has 7 stops. As for the J/Z, it serves a lower portion of Queens and is far separated from QBL and the 7, outside of the Archer avenue Line portion.
@@darkgalaxyi_o_l_o_i7831 the serve the entry runs all the way to Moss Boulevard two blocks away to the end of 31st St. how is it half a line it serves Astoria community
@@darkgalaxyi_o_l_o_i7831 but the Astoria line is a whole line for Astoria with the exception of ending at 31st and Ditmars Boulevard and not going to 20th Ave. But hopefully the MTA will N line to LGA
There all have a small portion in queens and little significance
@@AndrewBallProduction sure fools me with little to no seats till after 57 st during rush hour when they took the w away and they need to add it back you could’ve filled the whole train up and the first two stops demo and a story Boulevard and the rest were standing room. ..
Tech Transiiit 😃
7 Is A Goated Train
The seven is great ?
7 line uses CBTC technology, and that keeps trains close together. So in my opinion it’s not a fair fight, 7 easily wins. That’s like me saying for example L is better than the A.
😢😢😢
Yes, the 7 is great. I've worked on it a lot. And it has 550,000 a day not 800,000. Someone added up Times Square, 5th Avenue, and Grand Central and made the wrong assumption that nobody uses any other service so don't use that number, it's wrong. QBL moves about 650,000 a day. Deinternlining arguments are certainly interesting but miss some facts. The 63rd Street tunnel was designed to decongest the 53rd Street tunnel when it used to move 49,000 in the peak 8-9 rush hour. It was an amazing time to watch trains leave Roosevelt and Queens Plaza in those days. Passengers were as well trained as were the crews. But the problem went away when the E, F split. You have to look at origin and destination information to see if bringing it back together makes sense, but in the long run, splitting the peak hour load between the two tunnels makes more use of 63rd Street. Back to the 7 train, and its ridership capacity it cheats somewhat by dumping its load at Roosevelt and gets to fill up its capacity again. Your logic for the stairs at Roosevelt is valid, but imagine the loads on the stairs at 149th and the Grand Concourse in both directions (up and down) if you have the 4,5 and 2,3, delined. Not good. And you think 59th Street is crowded now - deline and the public will be fuming! This idea also does not understand yard capacity and what would happen at all the transfer points there is a lot to say, but not worth discussing. It would cost too much. Sure straight-lining has its advantages and should be considered now that we live in a post-covid lower peak environment. But there is more to what you're suggesting than you realize when it comes to people movement, operations, and maintenance. Also, QBL has a storage issue. Jamaica Yard is too small so they store on the main line. And making the R longer will just add to the reliability issues at local stations on QBL and in Brooklyn.
“Someone added up Times Square, 5th Avenue, and Grand Central and made the wrong assumption that nobody uses any other service so don't use that number, it's wrong.”
Those are entrances to the station, and does not count transfers. With a huge amount of people transferring from these stations, it is pretty justified to say 800,000 or so use the 7.
“The 63rd Street tunnel was designed to decongest the 53rd Street tunnel when it used to move 49,000 in the peak 8-9 rush hour. It was an amazing time to watch trains leave Roosevelt and Queens Plaza in those days. Passengers were as well trained as were the crews. But the problem went away when the E, F split.”
First of all, while it is true that the 63rd St Tunnel was designed to decongest 53rd, it doesn’t do so very well. There are two types of congestion: stations and trains. Let’s start with trains: before 2001, the E/F ran at a combined 30 tph. Now, it runs at 27 tph, thanks to the increase of merging conflicts. This means with fewer trains on QBL, more congestion happens thanks to the present service pattern. An F/M swap will bring back 30 tph to the express, which means lower crowding. For station crowding, the E and M loads are highly unequal. The E is packed, while the M is empty. This means people are waiting for the next express, not the next train, which means more people are waiting on the platform, causing increased station congestion. With an F/M swap, that station congestion will go down, as people will get on the next train.
“Back to the 7 train, and its ridership capacity it cheats somewhat by dumping its load at Roosevelt and gets to fill up its capacity again.”
I agree with that and that is what I said. Though I forgot to mention that the 7 does it smartly, where only the local stops there. If the express stops there too, then more people will transfer, which means the 7 will also have the same problem.
“but imagine the loads on the stairs at 149th and the Grand Concourse in both directions (up and down) if you have the 4,5 and 2,3, delined.”
That doesn’t make any sense when Roosevelt sees more crowding than what 149th-GC will see. Roosevelt sees 50 million people annually transferring (excluding 103 and 111), while the entire White Plains and Dyre lines sees 45 million people. This means that the crowding is manageable. Is it going to be overcrowded? Of course. But will be an apocalypse? Absolutely not .
“And you think 59th Street is crowded now - deline and the public will be fuming!”
96th St on Broadway sees twice to triple the transferring load than what 59th will see. And I know politics, which is why I say to deinterline gradually.
And yes, I understand we need more trains. But with a rebounding ridership, we already need more trains. The MTA, to their credit, knows this, and are ordering more trains.
And finally, I know we need yards. Which is why I have the E going to Springfield Blvd.
The 7 train is almost universally loved?!? What?! It is probably the most hated line behind the G. Its not like this changed recently either. It's been a crap line for the past decade. I lived off the N W line for awhile and it was the best commute I ever had in NYC. Trains every 5 minutes or less and they are never too crowded to board. 7 train during rush hour or a city field event, you cAn have 3 trains come without being able to board because it's so insanely crowded.
2nd 😂🎉
7✅
IBX?? That ain't happening. At least not in the next 35 years . NEPA will prevent the Street running section.
I'm not as cynical about the timeline, but I do hope the street-running section is prevented. It's one short stupid section holding it back from being a fully grade-separated subway. And it will make getting between Queens and deep Brooklyn so much better.
Street running should be banned outside of rural areas
@@qjtvaddict I don't think it's absolutely bad in the suburbs. Seems okay for single-tracked branch lines with 20-minute service. Just don't be Chicago where train platforms don't even fit in a single city block lmao.
@@samuelitooooo Well, that is one way to move up the design phase but I would prefer a heavy rail line that could be extended to the Bronx and beyond like the Triboro RX initially set out to do. Additional ROW may be necessary but it would be less intrusive than street running.
The MTA should tunnel instead. The MTA didn't even contact the the cemetery owner before declaring making a tunnel unfeasible. The owners have come out in favor of a tunnel.
Awww, I'm not sure 7 is better than Queens Boulevard. E and F trains are express. 7 is only one line from Manhattan to Flushing. E, F, M and R have different origins. And E and F each end in different places in Jamaica.
7 is only express in peak direction on weekdays. E is express both ways 6 a.m. to midnight. F is express both ways 24/7.
You are entitled to your own opinion. Personally, I don't think 24/7 express service automatically makes a line better than another.
Algorithm
The 7 and the L are the best.
Expand the 7 , and make a new line … the 7 is packed at rush hour
It runs by itself. So they can manage it better!
QBL is a complex set of services. It serves a much wider area that the IRT #7 could dream of.
If the Flushing goes out, people will still survive. If the QBL closes down, it would be a total nightmare.
The Flushing has very limited capacity. While the QBL has massive capacity. That's because the IRT cars are significantly smaller than the B division run by BMT and IRT.
The IND/BMT is a full 4 track local and express setup. But to be fair, half of that capacity is not really being used efficiently.
LIRR and Metro North has a similar setup. But the aren't afixed to the Express local setup that the subway is.
Advice! Build better terminals so this capacity can be used better and where the need exist. Queens Blvd morning to Jamaica doesn't need the same capacity as the morning rush to Manhattan. So the express track should travel the same direction. And the local should be used for some expeess skip stop for others in the lowet capacity section.
The IND/BMT more likely would provide a one seat ride.
The major crowding points during rush hours is Lexington Avenue at 50th Street.
It is why the N/W receive so much transfers from the #7. And most people are not interested in those stations south of Queensboro Plaza.
At this point the #7 service becomes inferior to other service. And the N/W/R (and Q🤔) has the best Manhattan routing in NYC.
It transverse the East and West and East again as a shuttle. This transcends anything that the #7 (E/F/M) can provide.
And it covers the full length of the tourist and business districts.
The the 7 is one line and not connected to any other line. The QBL has 4 lines and many other connections. You can’t compare them.
you can there the only major queens lines lol
The L line is not too shabby either.
The biggest de-interlining solver in (my opinion) would be discontinuing the M on 6th avenue, and make it run from broad street to metropolitan ave, get rid of the Z skip-stop service (increase J frequency) Run the F through the 63rd street tunnel, and lastly discontinue the W service so that the R could run to Astoria-Ditmars. I think this is shown at 11:44 but it would probably decrease overcrowding in manhattan due to delays from QBL and increase the frequency on the QBL and Jamaica Lines
You need to add a new transfer at Bowery for 6th ave express trains. Reducing the need for a one seat ride
@@qjtvaddict This I agree with. Would also distribute transfers among all 6th Ave lines instead of everyone packing onto the F.
you shouldn't get rid of firest hills turnback for trains because for 2-4 weeks a year ot serve a huge overflow of passengers from the anericab open internationaltennis tournament.
Blah blah
The urban planning take has little to nothing to do with how each line operates. You are just talking about personal preferences.
You don't even have to watch the video. It's not rocket science. The 7 has always been the MTA's baby. Even before CBTC. Everyone and their grandmother knows that. The L is baby #2. There are various reasons for this but I'd be here all day explaining them but I can tell you that politics does play a role. The 7 and and L also don't have to share tracks with other lines. Unfair comparison. The MTA can magically fix all these interlocking issues tomorrow and service will still be crap because the problem with QBL these days is the same problem thats is happening on most subway lines these days. There just isn't enough manpower at the moment. This is all due to the fallout from the pandemic. You can especially feel it on QBL during the weekends. F trains running every 15 minutes during the day which is completely ludicrous. But all the lines coming out of Coney suck these days especially on the weekends. QBL was decent pre-pandemic. It wasn't perfect but it was better than it is now. QBL was even better pre 63rd St but we know why. Things will improve when the signal modernerzation projects are completed and the M is restored to QBL.
Demons from the west
This is a terrible take. The E and the F are very reliable. And the interlining is a very useful feature.
I am more and more of the opinion that anyone who uses the word "de-interlining" is a crackpot.
"The E and the F are very reliable."
Me looking at the two minute variation at Forest Hills, Roosevelt Ave, and Queens Plaza: I would beg to differ.
"And the interlining is a very useful feature."
In the present day, not really. 63rd St isn't a major destination for F train riders. 53rd St is. And M train riders aren't taking the local all the way out to Manhattan, they are instead transferring to express trains the first moment they get.
"I am more and more of the opinion that anyone who uses the word "de-interlining" is a crackpot."
Congratulations. Instead of using actual data and facts to try to counter my points, you have to play ad hominem politics. That is very effective.
@@techtransitassociation - Local riders never take a local from one extreme point to another. For example, no one rides the C train from Queens to Upper Manhattan.
The important point is that the Queens Boulevard corridor is so heavily populated that it needs two local services (under ordinary circumstances, when there is no ongoing construction). That's the role that the M serves. And people coming from Queens Boulevard are going to a variety of different locations in Manhattan. To introduce the need to transfer for (an arbitrarily decided) half of them would be extremely inefficient.
I used to try to engage the de-interlining crowd on the merits. Sadly, this proved to be futile, as that belief was revealed as nothing more than a bit of mindless dogma. The strength of our system is that it can provide one-seat rides for many different types of trips. Someone who denies this historical reality is a crackpot, a goofball, a loony.
Notwithstanding your use of the anti-intellectual buzzword "ad hominem" as a means to silence valid criticism, the act of identifying someone for what that person demonstrates himself/herself to be is always correct and proper. Just as a serious mention of UFO abduction, the deep state, or admiralty law establishes conclusively that the speaker is a wingnut, so, too, does the mention of de-interlining. Welcome to the lunatic fringe.
I want to believe you are acting in good faith, but that cannot be achieved when you engage in ad hominem politics.
@@techtransitassociation - Empty buzzwords, combined with the removal of critical comments. Yes, the very epitome of good faith. Egad.
@@FerdinandCesarano
Sorry, did not see that reply. Let me respond properly.
" Local riders never take a local from one extreme point to another. For example, no one rides the C train from Queens to Upper Manhattan."
Yeah, that is true. My point that QBL local riders transfer to express trains that first time they get. Which means they don't have a one seat ride, more like a two seat ride.
"The important point is that the Queens Boulevard corridor is so heavily populated that it needs two local services (under ordinary circumstances, when there is no ongoing construction). That's the role that the M serves. And people coming from Queens Boulevard are going to a variety of different locations in Manhattan. To introduce the need to transfer for (an arbitrarily decided) half of them would be extremely inefficient."
You do realize that there is a ton of deinterlining proposals ranging from partial deinterlining to complete deinterlining, right? And let's have a genuine debate here. In this video, I called for an F/M swap on QBL, nothing more, nothing less. This means that the F train goes via 53rd St, and the M goes via 63rd St. That is it. That is the change.
According to Census data, QBL riders are heading to Midtown West, Midtown East, and the Financial District. This means that with zero one seat rides will be changed, because the E, F, M, and R all go there. In fact, you might be talking about a gain in one seat rides, as F train riders want 53rd St services. Since QBL east makes up the plurality of QBL ridership, at 42 percent, this means that yes, this change will benefit more people than hurt.
With transit planning, you aren't going to please everyone. Therefore, you create a service pattern that pleases as many people as possible. Since an F/M swap would actually give more one seat rides, it is a no brainer.
"The strength of our system is that it can provide one-seat rides for many different types of trips."
The problem with that assessment is that the one seat rides are straight up not good. Let's take the BMT Southern Division for example. The only two services you get are Broadway and 6th Ave and the majority of stations only get one service. This means if you want another service, you need to transfer. The thing is that Broadway and 6th Ave literally end up a block apart in Midtown, which means no one seat rides will be lost. Sure, there is always going to be that one rider that wants to go from 145th St to Brighton Beach in one trip. But it doesn't mean we kneecap our entire system to serve that.
Another one is Central Park West, where it is either 6th Ave or 8th Ave. There is some use to it, but I din't view that as a good interline because the reverse branch is two blocks, or a cross platform transfer at 125th St. Given how bad the service is on CPW (only 13 tph on the local, 17 tph for the express), many commuters take the first train into 59th and transfer to the express.
I can go on and on about ridership patterns, but "forced transfer" is nothing more than a farce in my opinion. The one seat ride options do not save you the transfer.
"Notwithstanding your use of the anti-intellectual buzzword "ad hominem" as a means to silence valid criticism"
No, not really. Because you called me a crackpot without any evidence.
"Welcome to the lunatic fringe."
Again, not really. The MTA is totally a lunatic fringe and has never deinterlined, right?
1949: End of Joint Operation. Separated the Astoria and Flushing Lines.
1959: 1 and 3 train swap
1998: B and C train swap
As you see here, the NYCTA/MTA has deinterlined before. And they were proposing to deinterline QBL, with the F and M train swap in 2020, before the pandemic slowed things down.
My Favorite 7 Line 🥰
I use the 53rd Street line every day now, and I gotta say when they swapped the F and M on the line, this line massively improved. I think there's a need to continue deinterlining and max out capacity at 179th St, but I have never had a bad time taking the current service alignment (but in Queens at midday going to Manhattan is a nightmare because of the midday 63 St work)
That should be just enough but other junctions like DeKalb and 59th St would be harder and the MTA won’t do it the way we propose if they did they would just swap the D and Q, but I rather have the B and N swapped and the R swaps with the D, so it has yard access also the D keeps Concourse Yard, which is where D Trains would go when sent to 95th St as their terminal. The B and D can make 36tph by having 18tph on each branch.
@@Reformperson something that's been bugging me about the 30 tph argument on the B and D is can the Manhattan Bridge handle it? I don't know that's why I'm asking 😅
@@loljuliowrld it can handle it DeKalb Junction currently runs 38tph but if deinterlined it can have up 66tph as The B and D make 36tph and Brighton Riders want Broadway Services so I had the (N) handle that since the Q is just a clone of the N. The B would be able to run 18tph on Sea Beach giving 100% increase in capacity. The D on the other hand runs 18tph on both Concourse and Bay Ridge, giving riders there huge boosts in frequencies.
@@ReformpersonI believe they're asking about the bridge itself.
Y'know… the fact that the bridge has to sustain the weight of four subway tracks and all the trains on them. Plus seven car lanes.
@@samuelitooooo that’s true and the Willamsburg Bridge is far worse with capacity because the J and M are both capped at 12tph as 24tph is the maximum capacity the Bridge can handle