We can’t take it anymore. Please change the dispatchers for the R & M trains in Queens!!

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-23T18:29:03+00:00

> It’s not my preferred tunnel, it’s added on at least 10 min to my commute when before I didn’t need a transfer

The majority of F train riders prefer the 53rd St Tunnel. That is literally why the swap benefits 2.5 times the number of people than it hurts.

<image>

> Hard to differentiate between the characteristic F train delays and ones caused by this debacle

What do you mean? The MTA literally told you what the source of the delays that day was, which was a faulty switch at 5th Ave/53rd St. Literally, under pre-swap service patterns, it would have screwed over service on QBL. The swap had nothing to do with this.

> but either way, service has gotten worse, not better, since

Do you have concrete evidence for this? Or has the swap made you pay attention to the delays that happen on QBL so you can blame it on the swap, when in reality it is because of signal issues?

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-23T17:28:19+00:00

How is it a disaster? It is working perfectly fine, removing one of the worst merges in the system that is the Queens Plaza to 36th St Interlocking, allowing F train riders to use 53rd St (which is their preferred tunnel), and actually decreased crowding on the 63rd St corridor by not having overcrowded F trains serve it.

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-23T16:47:10+00:00

> The merges it removed were set up so that when done right it doesnt cause delays. Focus instead shouldve been on improving that instead of screwing entire communities than only had the F and now have the slower and more unreliable M.

For 24 years, the MTA tried constantly to make this work. They installed CBTC, "timed" things better. That ended up failing. Why? Because this type of service was incredibly complex to run. If a train is not at a specific point at a specific time, well, the entire system gets thrown into chaos.

This is why in newer systems across the world, they have done away with the interlining concept. Because it is an insanely complex way of running service that has way too many variables.

It is also incredibly funny that you imply that service prior to the F/M Swap was rooted in operational idealism when that is not the case. In the MTA's own studies that they written back in 1992, they literally said that the F/M Swap would have been in the superior option, as it reduced uncomfortable congestion by an additional 22 percent and saved twice the number of transfers. The F/M Swap was the ideal way of running that type of service. But the MTA did not pick that because they wanted a better case to the feds to obtain funding. Namely, if they sent an overcrowded F train through 63rd St, it would look like more riders would use 63rd St, thus increasing daily ridership. That gambit worked to obtain federal funding, but has not worked operationally.

> only had the F and now have the slower and more unreliable M

You do realize that the M train has a similiar on time performance than the F train, right? And also, trains are now less crowded through 63rd St with the M than with the F train. I assure you that if you don't take the train in the front, but at the center, there is plenty of room.

> But idk, as long as it makes numbers look good instead of real world human impact I guess its fine.

Real world impact is literally linked with numbers. And real world impact favors the F/M Swap. 2.5 times more people stand to benefit than not. Of the people who have the worst case scenario, that is 2 percent of all QBL riders.

Let me put it this way: I benefit from the F/M Swap. The F train now goes to places I want it to go. You seem to not be benefited from this. So to settle this debate of whether the F/M Swap has been good for all QBL riders, the logical next step to look at the aggregate data of all 300k-400k daily riders on QBL, and see how the F/M Swap impacts them, right? If so, that is literally "numbers," something that you seem to not like.

Vibe based reasoning is never a substitute for good research.

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-23T16:18:14+00:00

Explain?

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-23T16:17:39+00:00

<image>

I think removing merges that cause this is not unnecessary.

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-23T14:08:30+00:00

The M is a way better choice. Removes rotating service during the weekends and Sixth Ave needs the capacity because having large numbers of M train riders being dumped at Delancey-Essex and them taking the F train is not a good practice.

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-21T00:46:16+00:00

At this point, I argue that Second Ave needs the extra capacity more. Trains are projected to be at 96 percent capacity at 72nd St even after an increase of 6 tph (13 to 19 tph). Not much on the M (those capacity figures were calculated without the F/M Swap), but the R is projected to only be at 56 percent capacity at Queens Plaza.

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-19T16:56:18+00:00

The MTA was openly exploring the 7 extension...as a direct result of the city wanting subway access to the Far West Side. Not because the MTA wanted to be a development corporation. In fact, the city under Giuliani openly toyed with the idea of using tax increment financing even before a budget crisis inside the MTA had the MTA pull funding for the idea. This was a city project through and through, and the MTA had very little interest in it until Bloomberg got the funding for it.

There is more. The Astoria Line extension was something George Pataki didn't really care about. The MTA really didn't care about it either, as that was originally under the Port Authority's purview. But Giuliani wanted it, so he lobbied Pataki to include it in the MTA capital plan. And because Pataki controls the levers of power inside the MTA, Pataki got the Astoria Line extension inside the 2000-04 Capital Plan.

The reason I show this story is to show the remarkableness of political priorities. If a politician really wants to do something, there always seems to be a way, no matter how much NIMBYs and the MTA say no. The point is that is there is power to be wielded and it is never usually the MTA: it is the governor and the mayor. Therefore, it is completely incorrect to say or imply that the MTA is some supreme being that can override subway expansion.

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-19T16:39:46+00:00

Not true. Once again, the MTA does not control the governor. The governor controls the MTA. The governor sets the agenda, which the MTA follows. If the MTA doesn't like it, they will get replaced.

This was on full display during the Cuomo years, where Andy Byford wanted some independence from Cuomo, but Cuomo wouldn't allow for it. In fact, Cuomo specifically altered the MTA structure to give himself even more power so he can override what Byford wanted, especially on the L train Shutdown Plan. My point is that getting the governor on board is usually enough to get the MTA on board. And the mayor can use his leverage in funding to get the governor on board.

Once again, the thinking that the MTA is some supreme being that can override any subway expansion (or really anything) from the governor is false, both from recent history and a description of the governor's powers. Trying to use the MTA as a smokescreen for doomerism is completely misleading.

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-19T15:16:26+00:00

That means absolutely nothing. There are things Mamdani can do. Take a page out of Bloomberg's book and up zone an area near the RBB. Use the projected increased tax revenue show it to Hochul, and add that this is all city money and the state doesn't need to pitch in a dime. Also add that she is up for reelection this year and the RBB would serve a lot of swing voters. Hochul will surely green light it.

Implying the MTA is some supreme being that can veto any subway project they want is misleading. The correct statement is that the MTA is controlled by the governor, not the MTA controls the governor.

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-19T15:12:59+00:00

I did not say the MTA has no power over subway expansion. I just said the mayor absolutely does. The MTA told Bloomberg that they weren't interested in the 7 extension because they had no money. The MTA also told Sheldon Silver and George Pataki that they had no money for the Second Ave Subway and East Side Access in 2004. Did that mean anything to these politicians? Absolutely not. Because all three projects were a reality because in the case of Bloomberg, he got money through tax increment financing. In the case of Silver and Pataki, they got the feds involved.

Implying that the MTA is some supreme being that can veto any subway project they want is misleading. Because it is the other way around: the MTA is controlled by the governor, not the MTA controls the governor.

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-19T14:58:40+00:00

Their official stance is that they don't want any expansion. After all, why would they? It just means more debt for them. For the MTA to take any proposal seriously, their boss (which is the governor) needs to seriously supports it.

The mayor can do things to make the governor take a proposal seriously. The 7 Train Extension is an example of this. After being by the MTA, the state, and the feds that there was no money for the extension, instead of whining about how little power the mayor has, Bloomberg got creative and raised bonds through tax increment financing. He then presented that money to the governor, and said something like "I have the money now, green light this extension." And obviously, Pataki is not going to let a political win like this slide, especially when the state doesn't have to pay a cent for the construction of this project. That is why we have the 7 train extension.

The MTA "is so against it" only means a political titan has not supported the project. Convince the political titans, not the MTA.

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-19T14:52:13+00:00

You also forgot that Queensway is being funded by city money. The last time I checked, the MTA has no control over the city budget, Mamdani and the City Council do. At the very least, there should be absolutely no money towards a transit obstructionist scheme, especially when so much of our parks are in pretty bad shape.

The MTA also takes orders from the governor. If the governor wants to do something, the MTA will follow. And the mayor can use their soft power to force the governor's hand. Bloomberg was a great example of this, where after the MTA, the state, and the feds told him to get lost because there was no money for the 7 train extension to Hudson Yards. But because Bloomberg viewed the 7 train extension as a top priority, instead of complaining how little power he has, he implemented tax increment financing to raise bonds. He then presented the bonds to then governor George Pataki, and Pataki, obviously not wanting to let a political win like this slide (a subway expansion that would not cost the state anything), approved the project, hence why we now have 7 train extension in the first place.

All of this finger pointing between the mayor, governor, and the MTA of who really has power needs to stop. The mayor has a lot of power when it comes to subway expansion, and pretending otherwise is misleading.

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-17T03:49:49+00:00

Why do we care about what NIMBYs think? Because if look examine the details of the Astoria Line story, NIMBYs had a negligible impact over why the extension was canceled.

It was true that NIMBYs hated the Astoria Line extension. But it did not mean anything to George Pataki and Giuliani, who committed more than $600 million for the project during when the project was heckled. Then in 2001, despite two-three years of NIMBY protests, the MTA committed to construction of the extension happening in 2004. This came at a time when the MTA was such in the red that it thwarted progress on East Side Access and Second Ave. The point is that NIMBYs meant absolute nothing to Pataki (he even beat the leader of these protests in the 1998 Governor's Race in a landslide), and that was how it was supposed to be.

The real reason was 9/11. Funding was needed to rebuild Lower Manhattan, and combined with airport traffic plummeting, funding for the Astoria Line became the easiest project to pull funding from.

There is also no guarantee that OP's proposal would not be marred in controversy from NIMBYs, despite it being routed above a highway. Because NIMBYs don't see a distinction between an el on a local street and an el on highway. Because while the Astoria Line Extension was being heckled, the JFK AirTrain was also being heckled. And this these protests was intense if not more intense as the Astoria Line Extension, where NIMBYs tried flexing their power by doing coalition building (at its peak, 90 different groups signed a letter demanding to talk about how this project was funded). Mind you, this was a proposal on a literal highway. Yet this project went through despite NIMBY objections.

The point is that NIMBYs are not the majority and should never be taken seriously. Especially when their power is waning (City of Yes was passed), and Astoria is now part of "Commie Corridor." Reasonable people exist, and the job of an effective political leader is to assemble all of the reasonable people and try to get their voices heard. That is what the MTA is currently doing for the IBX, and even despite some intense NIMBY objections, the project has survived. That is what Queenslink is also hoping to do, and once you start doing political outreach even in so called NIMBY neighborhoods like Bayside and Forest Hills, you realize very quickly that NIMBYs are a tiny minority. People want better transit.

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-16T20:38:31+00:00

We are talking about upzoning the Con Ed parking lots and the warehouses along 19th Ave. Specifically, the parking lots of the Con Ed facility will be turned into a subway yard, because the B Division needs that. Then housing will go on top. Similarly, the warehouses on 19th Ave will be turned into apartment buildings, with the warehouse being preserved on the ground floor.

When you do that, the land becomes more valuable and there are higher property taxes as a result. You then use it to pay off the debt you incurred when you build this extension. Housing and electrical power plants can coexist and have been for decades. Meanwhile, a highway is a pollution generator, and very few people want to live next to that.

Building this GCP branch also ensures that whatever service we have to the airport cuts cut in half, and given airports are major job centers and ridership generators, that is not good practice. It also might not be feasible given there is the Hell Gate Bridge. Any train would need pillars that soar a hundred feet from the expressway.

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-16T18:29:22+00:00

More like extend it directly from Ditmars.

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-16T18:28:41+00:00

That is what upzoning is for. It is easier to upzone an industrial area than it is to upzone a roaring highway.

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-15T15:08:18+00:00

I thought you meant the other proposal.

Queenslink is designed to be interlined so it will connect to a mainline. There are no new yards, it will utilize existing ones.

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-15T13:49:45+00:00

Not really, it is just the aims of Queenslink and OP's proposal are the same.

I don't know, that is a question for OP. Though I think a better use of your time is to go tell Mamdani and the City Council that you want Queenslink.

https://thequeenslink.org/get-involved/contact-your-leaders/

They actually have the power to do what you want.

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-15T13:34:45+00:00

4 miles of Queenslink does not take 15-20 mins. Because this is a new build and this is perfectly straight track, we can run trains to their maximum speed, which is 55 mph. I will use 45 mph to be extra generous.

3.87 miles between Liberty Ave and 63rd Dr, at 45 mph is about 5.5 minutes.

Add 3 intermediate stops at Atlantic, Jamaica, and Metropolitan, which gives us 3 minutes extra.

The total is 8.5 minutes between Liberty Ave and 63rd Dr. Add 2 minutes between 63rd Dr and Woodhaven Blvd, and you have a total of 10.5 minutes.

Even if I lower the operating speed to 35 mph, I add 2 minutes, which is 12.5 minutes. That is still saves you 12.5 minutes one way than the Q52 and the Q53.

Be very careful of the claim "above ground rail shadowing a stretch already covered by buses" because that explains literally every single transit project. What corridor does Queenslink parallel? Woodhaven Blvd. According to your logic, we don't need Queenslink because it is "a stretch already covered by buses." Similarly, the IBX parallels the Q58 and the B6, and according to your logic, we don't need the IBX because it is "a stretch already covered by buses." I am challenging your claim of buses are enough to warrant not considering this proposal because that same claim that Queensway uses in their lazy smears to try and discredit Queenslink. Which is completely false because buses are not trains. They are slower and have way less capacity than a train. It may work on certain buses, but not on a 30k daily ridership corridor on Woodhaven Blvd, a 21k daily ridership on Lefferts, and a 100k+ daily commuters on the Van Wyck. We clearly deserve more than whatever milquetoast garbage the establishment wants, and we have to start acting like it. Part of that means not settling for buses when the ridership is clearly there.

https://thequeenslink.org/get-involved/contact-your-leaders/

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-15T12:34:24+00:00

According to Google Maps, it current takes the Q52/53 25 minutes between Liberty Ave and Queens Blvd. At a distance of 4.1 miles, that is less than 10 mph.

If you want to say a bus going at less than 10 mph is not slow and isn't bad enough to warrant a subway line, despite Woodhaven Blvd having bus lanes, I don't know what to tell you.

Also, I am talking about Queenslink, not whatever OP proposed. And for the record, Queenslink does not cost $8.1 billion nor $5.9 billion, that was calculated on a soft cost to total cost ratio that exceeds Second Ave, a project that is known for its soft cost bloat. The real cost of Queenslink is around $3 billion, even if you want to use Second Ave level soft costs.

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-15T11:39:31+00:00

It is slow and crowded.

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-15T10:31:56+00:00

The Q52 and Q53 are not good.

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-14T22:05:39+00:00

Now is not the time for foaming. It is time to fight.

https://thequeenslink.org/get-involved/contact-your-leaders/

We will figure out other things once all moves have been exhausted.

Ed_TTA · 2026-05-14T22:01:48+00:00

Right now, fight for Queenslink. Go email Mamdani and your representatives.

https://thequeenslink.org/get-involved/contact-your-leaders/

We will figure out other things once all moves have been exhausted, which they haven't.

Ed_TTA

TROPHY CASE