Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The E train station at Seventh Ave (running East-West. and 53rd lays right atop the Q train running North-South. Those two trains are mere feet of one another at that intersection (one atop the other.)
Seems a shame to waste that proximity although I realize nothing can be done about it now. A platform would have to have been designed for the Q and staircases down to the E platform. But if they are tossing a billion a station, I'm sure this one could have been done for less than half that. You would not even need turnstiles or entry to the street because you already have that via the already existing E,B,D station...all they would need do is to rename the station E,B,D,Q.
If you think about it. The Q goes as far West as it does at precisely the point where the Eighth Avenue line goes farthest East. Pity they were not able to connect them.
The E train station at Seventh Ave (running East-West. and 53rd lays right atop the Q train running North-South. Those two trains are mere feet of one another at that intersection (one atop the other.)
Seems a shame to waste that proximity although I realize nothing can be done about it now. A platform would have to have been designed for the Q and staircases down to the E platform. But if they are tossing a billion a station, I'm sure this one could have been done for less than half that. You would not even need turnstiles or entry to the street because you already have that via the already existing E,B,D station...all they would need do is to rename the station E,B,D,Q.
If you think about it. The Q goes as far West as it does at precisely the point where the Eighth Avenue line goes farthest East. Pity they were not able to connect them.
The MTA has gone back and made plenty of connections where they were no connection. Most recently they connected the A, C, F at Jay Street to the R at Borough Hall. They also recently connected the E, M, G trains at Court Square to the 7 at Court Square, and the uptown 6 to the B, D, F, M at Broadway-Lafayette.
I think as the Second Avenue Subway moves into other phases, it may eventually become a concern. Keep in mind the heavily used 53rd Street E, M station was not originally connected to the 6 at 51st Street. A, C, E at Port Authority was not originally connected to the trains at Times Square, etc.
The MTA has gone back and made plenty of connections where they were no connection. Most recently they connected the A, C, F at Jay Street to the R at Borough Hall. They also recently connected the E, M, G trains at Court Square to the 7 at Court Square, and the uptown 6 to the B, D, F, M at Broadway-Lafayette.
I think as the Second Avenue Subway moves into other phases, it may eventually become a concern. Keep in mind the heavily used 53rd Street E, M station was not originally connected to the 6 at 51st Street. A, C, E at Port Authority was not originally connected to the trains at Times Square, etc.
So then I will maintain hope for getting to the extreme West side in the future. Today, the C train at 35th St. was just steps from the theater (The Barrow Group) so we took it uptown and across the park on the M96, negating the usefulness of the SAS. But with two perfect connections, all is forgiven.
For the nerds on here, does anyone know if the F train can easily switch at 63rd to the Second Avenue Subway?
In addition to that, what is the current most constraining factor for running more F trains? Is it the interlining with M or G? Or is it somewhere in the East River Tunnel, the interlining with the E or the turnaround at Jamaica?
I was thinking if the answer to the first question is that the F can easily switch to the second avenue subway tracks and that the tightest constraint on running more peak F trains is anything east of the 63rd Street Station, then shouldn't it be possible to run the F express train in Brooklyn now without hitting the local F train frequencies so hard? Basically, if the other bits are true, then the F express can then run up second avenue instead and more F trains in Manhattan and parts of Brooklyn can be run in general.
For the nerds on here, does anyone know if the F train can easily switch at 63rd to the Second Avenue Subway?
In addition to that, what is the current most constraining factor for running more F trains? Is it the interlining with M or G? Or is it somewhere in the East River Tunnel, the interlining with the E or the turnaround at Jamaica?
I was thinking if the answer to the first question is that the F can easily switch to the second avenue subway tracks and that the tightest constraint on running more peak F trains is anything east of the 63rd Street Station, then shouldn't it be possible to run the F express train in Brooklyn now without hitting the local F train frequencies so hard? Basically, if the other bits are true, then the F express can then run up second avenue instead and more F trains in Manhattan and parts of Brooklyn can be run in general.
Related question: Has changing from the 4/5/6 to the F at 59th st become any easier? Or the E at 51st?
Phase 2 the MTA says they will complete 2027-29. For 6 billion, as previously noted. 10 years and 6 billion for three more stops. Clearly this is unsustainable and they need to figure out how to fund phases 2-4 at once and find a way to get costs under control. We'll have to see what the incoming administration will do.
If it's $6B for just phase 2 (probably end up being more) then just kill any future SAS expansion it's not worth it
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.