|
|
| Re: Can F local trains from Manhattan terminate at CHurch Av when express service begins in fall 2017? (1397359) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Can F local trains from Manhattan terminate at CHurch Av when express service begins in fall 2017? |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Fri May 27 15:48:14 2016, in response to Re: Can F local trains from Manhattan terminate at CHurch Av when express service begins in fall 2017?, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Thu May 26 17:47:03 2016. Understand:If you saying that certain models of train models allowed quicker operation through the layup tracks maybe compared to some other models of trains. Or that the scheduling of terminating trains might need a review to reduce conflicts, or that one or two of the four full-length layup tracks would always have to be open to receive and release trains. I'd say fine. If you saying that switch-men or other train operators may be needed to help quickly turn trains around. Or that fallback staffing would help to give train crews at least a quick visit to the bathrooms. I'd still say fine. If you said that the process of discharging of passengers might have to be improved before any trains enter the layup area. Yes, improved methods could help many routes - not just the F-trains or G-trains of whatever length. I'd still say fine. All of that is a very different thing from saying that the physical train station that was designed from the ground up to be a train terminal somehow can no longer perform that function when the characteristics of the train switch/layup area has NOT CHANGED in any substantial way from the day it was designed and built! The above statements where I said "fine" - are what could be called train and personnel management issues - which frankly can be worked on. I believe there are procedures or rules that train dispatchers, train management people, union folk, etc. use and refer to so that train crews have bathroom breaks, etc. That is a people & staff management issue not a physical characteristics of the train station layout issue. It is not about well, "Technically F locals can terminate at Church ..." It is not "technically" - the basic features that allowed that to occur are very much present and used today, and have been present since 1934! Nothing I have said was a suggestion to terminate F-trains there. I simply said it was possible. I never made such a proposal as a remedy for the ridership problems on that line. Others tried to say it was "impossible". Really? It is just that there is a big difference between saying something "might not be a good idea", and saying something is IMPOSSIBLE. Mike -------- PS: The 57th Street-Sixth Avenue station could be an example of a station built as a terminal where NOW it would not be a good idea to regularly terminate trains there. Why? The characteristics AND the physical nature of the station itself has changed in a VERY SUBSTANTIAL WAY! That moves the discussion of terminating trains at 57th Street-Sixth Avenue from a "while it is not impossible" to a "it is not a very good idea" on a regular basis. And I would agree. And just to be clear, am I in no way suggesting trains get turned at that station regularly! PS: At the Freeman Street #2 & #5 station in the Bronx there used to be a set of track switches arranged in a "full-X" across all of the tracks from the days when the Second or Third Avenue elevated train terminated there. Those switches were completely removed making it impossible to terminate trains or to simply switch trains from one track to another in case of problems. The capabilities of the station changed in a substantial way making a prior activity not possible today. PSS: I would shout to the rafters that it is IMPOSSIBLE to route ANY IND trains (or BMT Trains or IRT Trains) along the Third Avenue Transit line in Manhattan!! Whether Wallyhorse or another forum person proposed such a plan, I'd say is IMPOSSIBLE TODAY to do so! Forget, "well "technically" .. nah, today it is impossible! LOL! |
|
|
|