It can become 24/7

@qjtvaddict sometimes no response is the best response

Bayside residents nimby blocked a 7 expansion over concerns about overcrowding from Flushing along with the "change in neighborhood character" It is 2024, and Bayside turned into Flushing, with all the car traffic everywhere. Also, no 7 expansion. Also, half of Bayside residents are Chinese

They love cars so much, they got that mentality engrave into them by car companies and Robert Moses (a.k.a the man who destroyed New York.)

Oh, they understand all right. Their language is indicative; it's only bent slightly. It means "I don't need Queens to have another train line in order to improve my profits."

@@FadkinsDiet so that’s what this is all about? Queensway exists because it is backed by a powerful organization that stands to make a profit out of it.

@Hyperstrike1 can I ask you something

@@CR1Creative Yes, go ahead.

@@Hypestrike1 Did you experience a G.O Weekend that effected your commute?

@@CR1Creative What's a G.O Weekend?

What climate crisis bro? It's called weather, I swear white libs man lol

If you are interested, reach out to the Queenslink at info@queenslink.org, as they definitely like more help and this issue is urgent, considering that Queensway will begin construction in June of this year.

Only with the Queens Bus Network Redesign would this be true for me. Which would still be nice. But currently any bus I need to get home all go to Jamaica and no further. With the redesign I get the Q51 which would go to the present-day Rockaway Blvd station. P.S. It's the end of July and nothing's happened yet. 🤞🏻🤞🏻

It's not about needs. It's about trying to keep the "wrong kind of people" away from their neighborhood.

​​@@FadkinsDiet Which, considering how NYC works, doesn't work Bayside residents nimby blocked a 7 expansion over concerns about overcrowding from Flushing along with the "change in neighborhood character" It is 2024, and Bayside turned into Flushing, with all the car traffic everywhere. Also, no 7 expansion. Also, half of Bayside residents are Chinese. And because the Chinese in the area ignore most of zoning code, Bayside is no longer the quaint, quiet neighborhood the original residents wanted the protect. The USPS in the area even started calling my zip code Flushing

Robert Moses moment

Yup. They don't want "those people" in their neighborhoods.

Finally someone said the quiet part out loud. This nonsense really does dominate seemingly every aspect of American life, ESPECIALLY when it comes to city planning and mobility. These same scumbags constantly lecture black people about "not complaining and pulling themselves up by their bootstraps" yet do everything in their power to sabotage those efforts and enforce the status quo that benefits them.

definitely for the people in Forest Hills & Kew Gardens

Which, considering how NYC works, doesn't work. Bayside residents nimby blocked a 7 expansion over concerns about overcrowding from Flushing along with the "change in neighborhood character" It is 2024, and Bayside turned into Flushing anyways, with all the car traffic everywhere.

Amtrak transfer at penn to LIRR then buses elsewhere from kew gardens

Well there goes that hope

Does not fit his agenda anyone with half a brain would have taken the bus, but the author of the video isn't very smart

@@lioneljones6484 Because I had wait a very long time for the bus. So I figured that if I took the train, it would eventually catch up with the bus I missed. Also, I made sure that I didn’t have to wait 16 minutes for the shuttle. If you want to hurl insults at me, maybe actually try to engage with facts?

​@@jointransitassociationHow long did you have to wait? 🤔 Assuming this was a weekday (judging by the arrival of a Rockaway Park-bound A train), there was a Q53 bus scheduled to leave at 5:09 PM and arrive at 6:05 PM. If you had missed that bus, the next one would arrive in 10 minutes, not 15. Even if this was a weekend where A trains are every 20 minutes, Q53s are never scheduled for more than every 12 minutes, except overnight…

@@samuelitooooo Welp, that was interesting. When I got to the bus stop, I saw it being pretty desolate, so I assumed the bus left. So I checked and I decided to take the shuttle because it was going to leave in 2 minutes. So, I took that. Also, that is interesting because as someone who found myself commuting between Liberty Ave and Queens Center Mall more times than I would have liked, Google Maps always says that it would be a 20 minute trip. But in reality, it was 25 or greater trip. And the Q52/53 are never good to me. I had to wait like 15 minutes for one. So I decided to take the Q11 instead, which was okay.

@@lioneljones6484man you are clueless in all the times you commented on this channel

We can have it something like this: - (F) Far Rockaway to Coney Island - (V) Rockaway Park to 2 Av

That requires IBX to the Bronx for regional links

spiral M

Already exists that ship sailed with the airtrain

You are making the project more expensive than it needs to be. Queenslink in its current form is fine. The interlining actually adds capacity because of the setup at Forest Hills.

Ohh another one ehh I will keep quiet now

Ohh IND 1943 plan

why is the vancouver skytrain a "gadgetbahn"?

Not yet sadly

No just build an EL above the park

The M is the only one that makes sense because the R won’t have access to Jamaica Yard and the G isn’t where riders are going.

Politics. Local service used to run all the way to 179th before people living east of Forest Hills wanted direct express service, so the MTA used Forest Hills.

@@jointransitassociation That’s dumb, even though the idea of express service being only a little bit faster is quite unheard of. Did you know that it would save only about 10 minutes from Jamaica 179th all the way to Queens Plaza, so it should be fine? Sounds good, but it’s not worth making operations harder for the MTA just to let some riders be like seven minutes faster, and most riders would get the express anyway

@@jointransitassociationhe local stations east of forest hills don’t have the ridership to justify direct express service and most buses connect to express stations anyway

@@collectivelyimprovingtrans2460which is why this should include capturing the port Washington line and having queenslink merge with port Washington tracks then 63rd Street line thus deinterlining queens blvd

What I say to that is people will manage. There are train lines in the world that are extremely weird and make absolutely no sense, and people have managed. Singapore's Downtown line, Toronto Line 1, Istanbul Line 1, and for a while, Lisbon's Blue line were extremely weird and make no sense. But people made sense of it and if you asked anyone living in those cities, they will probably answer that they depend on those lines, or at the very least, say that line has bought great benefit to the city. There is no doubt that New Yorkers will also make sense of this new M line once Queenslink gets built. Also, cosmetics aren't an issue right now. Today, the discussion is not whether the M, R, or G, is sent down there, it is whether a train would ever run on the Rockaway Beach branch. A politically connected, minoritarian group is out there making sure that trains will never run on the branch ever again, and is slated to have their horrible ideas become reality in about a month. Unless we stop further dividing ourselves by squabbling which train line gets sent down there, nothing will ever be done. We need to unite to stop this horrific project known as the Queensway because last time I checked, we are in support of the Queenslink, or the idea that the Rockaway Beach branch needs to see trains again. If you are interested, email the Queenslink at info@queenslink.org. Help educate others around you, and if you are old enough to vote, vote in Queenslink supporting politicians this coming June for city council, and vote out Queensway supporting politicians.

@@jointransitassociation I have no intention of doing this argument all over again. I signed the petition, and I hope that it goes ahead.

Oh boy, where do I begin with this. First of all, I think I made it pretty clear on this channel that talking about the specifics of Queenslink is a huge waste of time. The question right now isn't what train to run down the RBB, but whether trains would ever run down the RBB ever again. And so far, it is a no, because of Queensway. We are up against a well oiled machine that knows how to play politics. They know that they have to unify on one singular message and use their political connections to get what they want. And they did it, very well. This is why despite efforts to reactivate the RBB existed since the 1960s, and Queensway coming in the 2000s, Queensway won. But we have a chance to win against them because they don't have a firm timeline yet, and we should not be dividing ourselves on every petty issue. And I can just stop there, but I want to give a more substantive response. So let me respond to a few of your statements. "Queens link is dead in the water if it remains a subway proposal which includes construction in Forrest Hills to connect to the IND Queens Blvd Line, community opposition along with what is going to happen to QBL LCL Service with all the new merges will be a nightmare." The first part of the statement is not true. Forest Hills residents generally approve of the Queenslink. I have been at the volunteer events in Forest Hills, and Queenslink always gets 50 new supporters in a few hours every time they do those events. The problem is how Queensway effectively played minority politics and tried to astroturf their way into government. That's the entire story. The NIMBYs are in the minority, but since they know how to play politics, they are winning. And it is our duty to fight back, because we have the numbers and data on our side. And second, as a massive deinterlining advocate, I support Queenslink being built in its current form. That is because you can get an extra 10-16 tph on QBL's local tracks because of that merge. As I explained in the video, Forest Hills is a terrible terminal, but diverting the M away, you opened more terminal slots for the G to come back to QBL. That is how you get that extra capacity. I always see interlining people fixating heavily on that new merge, and I am just sitting there like, there is a more to it than that merge. You actually get more capacity by interlining, so that's why I support interlining. It is consistency, I am a deinterlining advocate because of I want more service to be run. And what happens when interlining leads to more service being run? I will support interning in that instance. And before I hear the "timing" defense, you absolutely can time two trains at different frequencies. The problem is when you time three, four, or sometimes five trains. So this merge is negligible. "while the Rockaway Branch maintained its route giving neighborhoods from the Rockaways to Howard Beach to Ozone Park a faster way into other portions of Queens and Midtown, instead of a long slog on a QBL Local. " Sure, by moving it to QBL local, it would be slow, but you still save 12-15 minutes of travel time despite the A being an express on Fulton. Again, it took me an hour and 12 minutes, and using QBL local, it would be less than an hour, to 58 or so minutes. "You also face the issue that reactivating White Pot Junction is much easier than connecting the Rockaway Branch to whatever provisions the IND made for the Rockaway Branch to connect to QBL," I oppose LIRR on the RBB for two reasons. The first one is pretty simple, subway trains and LIRR trains can't mix. You would need an insane amount of capacity on the LIRR to supplement even the current level of service on the Rockaways. And that capacity I argue should be going elsewhere, like Port Washington. And the entire point of Queenslink is more service, so have fun forgoing that option. And second, yes, you need to build that tunnel. But you open up so many new connections in Queens that LIRR simply cannot provide. Want a quick way to go to Flushing? Transfer at Roosevelt, which would be less crowded thanks to a conversion of Woodhaven to an express station. Want to go to Jamaica? Take the M to Woodhaven and transfer to the E/F that runs every 2 minutes. Want to go to LIC, a growing job center? Take the M to Court Square. You can always say, build more infill stations, but at the cost of those infill stations would be equal to that tunnel at QBL. And you would get more capacity on QBL by doing that tunnel, while on the LIRR, you don't. So QBL wins by a mile here.

Buddy why not link to the 63rd line? You getting roasted

By making Woodhaven express, E/F travel times won't increase much, if at all. Overcrowding at Roosevelt slows express trains down significantly, but if riders have the option of transferring at Woodhaven, then crowding at Roosevelt would decrease, meaning less delays. So travel times might actually stay the same or even go down, as less crowding at Roosevelt means faster boarding, decreasing travel times.

@@jointransitassociation NY is infamous for its struggles with underground rail construction going overbudget. With cost as the biggest argument against Queenslink, conversion should be a separate project.

@@ssn2186 You are kind of underestimating the crowds at Roosevelt. Adding more passengers to an already overloaded station is only going to increase delays from transferring. By having Woodhaven Blvd be an express station, riders wanting to make that transfer will use that station instead of Roosevelt, and some riders that typically transfer at Roosevelt will shifted to Woodhaven, which will decrease delays. Converting Woodhaven Blvd after doing Queenslink will make everyone's life more convoluted than it needs to me. Roosevelt will be overburdened, which will only increase delays. By converting Woodhaven along with the Queenslink, that scenario will be eliminated. And to the cost point, provisions already exist to covert Woodhaven as an express station, meaning reduced costs.

Travel times on the E and F will not increase with the conversion of Woodhaven Blvd to an express station (which should be done before QueensLink anyway), though many riders will benefit from this too. When 4 and 5 trains began stopping at 59th Street, travel times did not increase there,

I know I messed up when Jeremiah replies to my comment 💀 I don’t know why I didn’t think about it like that before. I live on the E and I was just always afraid of having my direct express service taken away or changed some way. I also didn’t know the 4/5 trains didn’t always stop at 59th st. That’s pretty nice.

That is way too far from the Rockaway Beach branch, does not boost Rockaway capacity in any way, and does not decrease Rockaway rider's commute times. The IBX is a separate project from the Queenslink, just as how the Second Ave subway is a separate project from building Utica.

It doesn't mean that I want IBX, but this defense of the IBX is somehow going to replace the Queenslink is untrue. Build both the IBX and Queenslink.

What was that project about ?

​@@daoudak196 Norristown King of Prussia extension. It tried to chase after a couple thousand suburbanites who'd probably take their cars to the station anyway.

That is why there are transit advocacy groups like Queenslink fighting for it. Just saying that we can't do it because there is no money for it is not a defense when we spend money all the time on questionable things. A reminder that the IBX wasn't even on the radar before 2021, but since Hochul proposed it, somehow the MTA is rushed out a study just for it. Quenslink has been hard at work trying to give the RBB more airtime, and if you are interested, we would love to open up a conversation on it.

@@jointransitassociation please advocate for it, but just as we see plans scotched from way back in the second system plans, to the present, I don’t hold my breath for this plan. Of all the ideas for expansion, my first choice is extending into southeast Queens.

@@larryd2439won’t that be a LIRR service cut

Honestly, I don't like it. The NYC Subway would be more effective than the LIRR, as it offers more connections like the IND Queens Blvd line, the IRT Flushing Line, and multiple trunk lines in Manhattan than the LIRR. As for LRT on Woodhaven Blvd, I don't like it. In my opinion, LRT has the potential to become the next gadgetbahn/glorified bus in NYC. Just take a look at what they are doing with the IBX, as since they chose light rail, they can now run it at grade. At least with conventional rail/subway, people know what you are talking about, meaning whatever scaledowns would be politically infeasible. Also, the Rockaway Beach branch parallels Woodhaven Blvd, so converting the branch to subway would be the best option.

NO

They will propose LRT and will end up with "BRT" instead. The best "BRT" in the country according to the FTA is the Cleveland Health Line and it's a cruel joke compared to the BRT lines in Latin America.

Yes, I know. But when QW people are not even entertaining the idea of putting provisions down for future rail, I can't take them seriously.

@@jointransitassociation That's your mistake. You should take anyone with significant political support seriously. If you could get the Queens Borough President to support you, that would help. But the Cross Borough Express has momentum, so your best move might be to get behind that. It would get you valuable political contacts and you would learn a lot about how to push transit effectively. I played a role in three projects: Second Av Subway Phase 1, AirTrain and the 63rd Street Connector project. I still write to elected officials about Phase 2. I don't waste time supporting proposals that have no chance of being funded. The Utica Av Subway is an exception, because the Brooklyn Borough Prez might one day get his act together and we might see that done.

@@ronaryel6445 I can support both the IBX and Queenslink and Phase 2 of SAS. It isn't mutually exclusive. And I didn't say I don't take elected officials seriously, I said I don't take QW people seriously. Especially when Queenslink reached out to QW to work with them, and QW said no. QW is the problem, and the sooner we figured that out, the better for us to assemble our own coalition. A coalition mind you, that assembles people from all over the political spectrum and has way more local support than QW. Politics change all the time. If you told me three years ago that the IBX was going to move forward, I won't believe you. It was because politics changed. Now, we have another mayoral election, and with the narrative changing around Queenslink, who knows what will happen. But what I do know is that QW will have a far less chance of happening without Eric Adams. That is why QL is fighting to continue the dream of rail on RBB.

@@jointransitassociation Yes you can. But you're not doing it. You're spending most of your effort where you are least likely t get results.

​@@ronaryel6445 So? It is called fighting the good fight and not letting the NIMBYs win. And giving up right before the mayoral election is foolish.

Feel free to use those comebacks!

This shouldn't be the main discussion right now. Right now, it isn't whether we send the M, the R, the G, or whatever service you want down Queenslink, it is about whether trains will ever run on the Rockaway Beach branch ever again. We all are in support of the reactivation of the Rockaway Beach branch, meaning that we all need to be unified in getting the city to choose Queenslink over Queensway.

I agree. I think the G train would be the better option since it can run on QBL lcl. If the E train were to go to be rerouted here then there would have to extend either the R or M to Jamaica and there would be no express service after Forest Hills

I'd make it the E since it's the shortest line on Queens Blvd.

@@pbatommy Having the E Train run here would probably make it run lcl on QBL since tunnel provisions are off the lcl tracks. Having one of the lcl service (R or M) would be better or extending the G.

@@juanlozada1455 the R is already too long. The G can't fit.

Just boost railroad frequencies as those have metro north and LIRR service

@@qjtvaddict No you don't know what you're talking about because you obviously know nothing about the high density terrain of Southeast Queens. Those old LIRR lines wouldn't be nearly enough.

@@qjtvaddict And Metro North doesn't even run anywhere in Queens. Get your big non New Yorker *ss outta here.

You're absolutely right! What if the park Vandalized? If difficult for the police to investigate in a long queensway park.

What if a person arson the queensway park?

You forgot that there will no longer be a long wait, however, for the Rockaway shuttle. There will be a one-seat ride from the Rockaways to Midtown Manhattan with relatively high frequency. JFK Airport will also have better connections.

@@empirestate8791 I've accounted for the Rockaway Shuttle wait in my calculation. The base line time of 72 minutes was established in the video between the 7:41 and 8:58 marks. The ride included a change to the shuttle to get to Rockaway Park. The trip started at Penn Sta 3:03pm and ended at 4:15 pm. The base line trip duration was correctly reported as 72 minutes. I used the MTA's schedule timetables to figure out what the proposed M-train trip duration would be. There are 5 morning through A-train expresses that originate at Rockaway Park. No additional time taken at Broad Channel for shuttle transfers. I noted this in my explanation. The scheduled running time this A-train express from Rockaway Park to Rockaway Blv is 23 minutes. That's the time I used in my calculation. The total running time for a simulated M-train from Rockaway Park to 50th St came to 67 minutes, based on the MTA's schedules. One might suggest adding in the time to 34th St to make a running time comparison more "apples-to-apples". That would add about 2 minutes to the trip time, bringing it up to 69 minutes. This means that the M-train would provide a savings of 3 to 5 minutes, depending where in midtown the journey ended. That's the QueensLink's time savings for Rockaway Park residents. Rockaway Park service may be slow but QueensLink will not improve it to any significant extent. I too, would change the topic, if I were trying to justify QueensLink's raison d'etre on the basis of time savings from Rockaway Park. The rationale for increasing JFK service via Howard Beach is just as specious. The Port Authority's JFK monthly traffic report for Dec 2019, shows there were 6,684,691 paid AirTrain passengers using Jamaica and 2,023,472 paid AirTrain passengers using Howard Beach during all of 2019. Only 23% of paying AirTrain passengers use Howard Beach and the A-train. The way to get to JFK is to take the E-train to Sutphin Blv. How important are those 2 million Howard Beach AirTrain passengers, compared to the other 400+ subway stations? AirTrain passengers are counted twice because they pay to enter and exit. Halving the AirTrain's total would make its turnstile figure comparable to subway station turnstile counts. The AirTrain's Howard Beach's 1,011,736 estimated entering passengers would have ranked 359th out of 424 recorded Subway stations. It would have been placed just behind Sea Beach N-train's Avenue U station. This illustrates the small role that rail links to airports play in NYC.

Okay, let's take a look at that schedule. 15 minutes to cover 3.2 miles is absurdly slow, as that is less than 13 mph. No train in NYC runs at 13 mph. It might be the case in 1962, when trains were slower, but definitely not the case in 2023, when trains (especially on QBL) can hit 45 mph. But you might be objecting, saying that the train has to make stops, and that is why we see that 13 mph statisitic. Okay, let's take that schedule again, but see the speeds in between stations. From Rego Park to Parkside, it is one mile, and it takes 4 minutes. That is a rate of 15 mph. From Parkside to Brooklyn Manor, it is 1.25 miles, and it takes 4 minutes. That is a rate of around 19 mph. From Brooklyn Manor to Woodhaven, it is .4 miles, and it takes 3 minutes. That is a rate of 8 mph. From Woodhaven to Ozone Park, it is .6 miles, and it takes 3 minutes. That is a rate of 12 mph. I might understand if there is a sharp curve that slows trains, but it is a straight track, meaning that modern trains can easily hit 45 mph on that section. Let's take that 45 mph statistic for a second. The distance to cover is 3.5 miles (QBL to Ozone Park). This means that the running time (without stops) is 4 minutes and 40 seconds. The Queenslink will have intermediate stops at Atlantic Ave, Brooklyn Manor, and Parkside. Average dwell time in the system is 40 seconds, so that will add 120 seconds, or two minutes to the time, making the Queenslink 6 minutes and 40 seconds. Using that, the true run time from Penn Station to Rockaway Park is not 67 minutes, but rather 58 minutes and 40 seconds, which saves 13 minutes and 20 seconds. But you might be saying, hang on, 45 mph is a bit too optimistic. Okay then, let's use 35 mph, even though the tracks could easily handle 45 mph. Using the exact same calulations, we arrive at 6 minutes, plus two minutes for stops, making it 8 minutes. That is 60 minutes, or a 12 minute save. I didn't even factor in having commuters transfer at Woodhaven Blvd for express trains, and the local M easily beats out the express A by quite a margin. But let's factor in transfering for express trains at Roosevelt. (Before you object to crowding at QBL, know that with deinterlining and CBTC, there will be an increase from 27 tph to 36 tph) It takes a commuter 23 minutes to get from Woodhaven Blvd to Penn Station, if there is no wait (because currently, Woodhaven is a local, and transfering to Roosevelt will require waiting). With Woodhaven being an express, that is around 21.5 minutes to Penn Station. 21.5 + 7 (from Queenslink) + 23 is 51.5 minutes. Factor in waiting two minutes for the express at Woodhaven, and that is 53.5 minutes. That leads to a time savings of 18.5 minutes. So you might be asking, why did I show that schedule? I showed it to prove that the A train has a circuitous route, and Rockaway riders are taking the train a longer distance than it needs to be, to the point where even a local train making more stops can beat out the A making express stops.

Technically the time savings will be longer with the transfer to the E train at Roosevelt Avenue or even Woodhaven Blvd if that station is converted to an express stations. Many potential riders may do just that

​@@jointransitassociationWe need to remove Queensway and have Queenslink

I beg your pardon?