Home ∑ Maps ∑ About

Home > SubChat

[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]

[1 2 3 4 5]

< Previous Page  

Page 2 of 5

Next Page >  

(1142780)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Joe V on Sat Mar 3 13:14:45 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Mar 3 12:23:12 2012.

Which is why I brought up skip/stop.

Disadvantage is you can't travel locally between an A and a B stop. True, but every 4th or 5th stop stays all-stop, as do the busier Park Slope stations.

Since trains do not travel very fast thru skipped stations, 4 minute intervals doesn't preclude a smooth operation.

Post a New Response

(1142791)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by grand concourse on Sat Mar 3 15:21:00 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Mar 3 12:23:12 2012.

If the V were still around, I would've thought that could've been express to Church and maybe replace the F to Stillwell (for rush hours only). While the F terminated at Church with the G and gives Park slope riders what they want: direct, frequent Manhattan bound service as well as seats. Basically while the Park slope riders outnumbers the southern part, the F is really serving 2 different segments of riders.

But with the M staying, and others saying 1/6 F trains can be express, it seems that's the best they can do.

Post a New Response

(1142792)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by grand concourse on Sat Mar 3 15:21:31 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by LRG5784 on Sat Mar 3 12:26:08 2012.

True.

Agreed.

Post a New Response

(G00GLE)

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !


(1142805)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by J trainloco on Sat Mar 3 16:14:00 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Mar 3 12:23:12 2012.

If you're going to run a short turn service, then it definitely should not be the express. The only advantage of a short turn service on Culver is that it provides extra service to the inner, busier stations. If any service were to operate express, it would need to be the service that runs further out. Prior to the M/V combo, I thought you could swap the C and V at W4th, and have the F as a 24/7 local service, terminating at church when the C ran, and run the C to Culver as a 16/5 service all the way to Stillwell, express between Church and Jay. But now that the M has replaced the V, I think that any prospect of Culver express service is gone. At best, the G will continue to run to church as a supplementary local service.

Post a New Response

(1142831)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by grand concourse on Sat Mar 3 18:41:55 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by J trainloco on Sat Mar 3 16:14:00 2012.

If you were to swap the V and C, then you may as well have swapped the E and F. No sense in overusing the W4th switches when you can set them once.

Post a New Response

(1142861)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by grimace1169 on Sat Mar 3 21:46:43 2012, in response to Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Gold_12TH on Fri Mar 2 15:28:01 2012.

Makes me wonder why , except for money, is the TA entertaining the possiblity of turning the G again at 4th Ave when the tower is OOS at 4th Ave. See pics posted on NYCSubway.org. AFAIK the plans for the master tower at Church Ave. are on hold. So what gives???

Post a New Response

(1142865)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by grimace1169 on Sat Mar 3 22:24:54 2012, in response to Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Gold_12TH on Fri Mar 2 15:28:01 2012.

Makes me wonder why , except for money, is the TA entertaining the possiblity of turning the G again at 4th Ave when the tower is OOS at 4th Ave. See pics posted on NYCSubway.org. AFAIK the plans for the master tower at Church Ave. are on hold. So what gives???

Post a New Response

(1142869)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Abba on Sat Mar 3 22:47:33 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by LRG5784 on Sat Mar 3 12:26:08 2012.

Why not just run the G express to Kings highway or 18th ave and thats the last stop.Smith 9th and church ave both have a problem that trains in back get backed up.Kings Hwy and 18th ave wouldn't have these problems.Am I right? Itcould be that Church ave wouldn't have that problem once the express resumes.But still why not make some commuters happy?

Post a New Response

(1142875)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Concourse Express on Sat Mar 3 23:09:03 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Abba on Sat Mar 3 22:47:33 2012.

The (G) cannot run express. The express tracks heading to Bergen St from Jay ramp down below the Crosstown tracks coming in from Hoyt; the (G) doesn't have a chance to switch to exp 'til after Smith-9, making it rather pointless since it would bypass the 4 Ave - 9 St transfer.

my blog

Post a New Response

(1142876)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Abba on Sat Mar 3 23:13:59 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Concourse Express on Sat Mar 3 23:09:03 2012.

Maybe run F express and terminate G church ave? I think trains terminating at local track at church can turn around without affecting F express service though I'm not sure.


Post a New Response

(1142877)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Concourse Express on Sat Mar 3 23:19:46 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Abba on Sat Mar 3 23:13:59 2012.

Express trains through Church do not interact with the relay tracks so locals can indeed terminate at Church w/o interfering with the express.

However, running all (F) service express there is not politically feasible since Park Slope riders want one-seat Midtown access and the local stops between Jay and Church have decent ridership. Additionally, the 4th Ave - 9 St transfer is a local stop. That's why I suggested only running the Kings Hwy short-turn (F) trains express while the rest run local.

Of course, what will be done at the conclusion of the Culver Viaduct rehab remains to be seen...

my blog

Post a New Response

(1142878)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Mar 3 23:23:50 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Michael549 on Sat Mar 3 09:53:56 2012.

Mike:

The (K) is a true supplemental line, hence why I only have that as a 4-5 tph at max, and because such a (K) line is really a supplement, that could even be just 3-4 tph and 2 tph overnights since its main purposes would be for people too lazy to walk up to the (A) platform at Chambers and for those who need specific stations from specific others along 8th Avenue to where it could even run at all times as a five-car train as opposed to 10.

My real point in doing that exercise was to point out that the only real way to me that we can have a Culver Express would be for the (C) train to be branched off the 8th Avenue line at West 4th with that serving as the Culver Express and running to Coney Island. That's why unless you can get enough cars to cover such changes I noted (which as you noted right now would be difficult due to a car shortage).

Post a New Response

(1142901)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sun Mar 4 01:36:39 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Concourse Express on Sat Mar 3 23:19:46 2012.

However, running all (F) service express there is not politically feasible since Park Slope riders want one-seat Midtown access and the local stops between Jay and Church have decent ridership. Additionally, the 4th Ave - 9 St transfer is a local stop. That's why I suggested only running the Kings Hwy short-turn (F) trains express while the rest run local.

In addition to only having the KH F trains run express, they could also have some Church Av put-ins that run local, and publish the schedule at the local stations on pillars or something. There would still be less frequency than *all Fs* but 50% of the Fs and a few guaranteed seat Fs would probably be enough.

Post a New Response

(1142912)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by LRG5784 on Sun Mar 4 08:51:34 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Mar 3 23:23:50 2012.

Smh

Post a New Response

(1142922)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Wayne-MrSlantR40 on Sun Mar 4 11:01:43 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Michael549 on Sat Mar 3 09:53:56 2012.

Car shortage. Shame on them for scrapping the perfectly-usable Phase II R32s.

-wayne-

Post a New Response

(1142933)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by grand concourse on Sun Mar 4 11:34:10 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by LRG5784 on Sun Mar 4 08:51:34 2012.

+1

Post a New Response

(1142935)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Railman718 on Sun Mar 4 11:42:36 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Mar 3 23:23:50 2012.

from specific others along 8th Avenue to where it could even run at all times as a five-car train as opposed to 10.

Bro they DONT have the cars to spare....

Lotta things going on down here...

Post a New Response

(1142947)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Mar 4 13:27:24 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Concourse Express on Fri Mar 2 15:58:39 2012.

Keeping it extended to Church probably means an extra trainset and crew.

Post a New Response

(1142949)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Mar 4 13:29:07 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Concourse Express on Fri Mar 2 15:58:39 2012.

Yeah, the M train means there will be NO regular Culver express service, it was always predicated on the possibility of extending the V to Church Ave.

Post a New Response

(1142951)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Mar 4 13:30:16 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by J trainloco on Fri Mar 2 18:40:20 2012.

Rush hour, the F runs at 15 TPH. Neither the N, Q or R run more than 10. F+M = 24 TPH. That realistically leaves only 6 for another train.

Post a New Response

(1142962)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Mar 4 15:22:13 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Mar 4 13:27:24 2012.

And So?

Worth the money at twice the price.

ROAR

Post a New Response

(1142963)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Mar 4 15:23:30 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Mar 4 13:29:07 2012.

Eh? The LION would extend the (C) train, but then that was predicated on sending the (V) to Chambers.

ROAR

Post a New Response

(1142965)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Mar 4 15:36:00 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Mar 4 15:22:13 2012.

MTA is short of cash.

Post a New Response

(1142987)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by grand concourse on Sun Mar 4 16:45:33 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Mar 4 15:23:30 2012.

If you are suggesting to send the E to Lefferts, then that's too much service for the fulton local stops (not to mention it might clog up the river tunnel with the amt of trains the A needs). The C is fine as is.

Post a New Response

(1142989)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by italianstallion on Sun Mar 4 16:46:51 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by grand concourse on Sun Mar 4 16:45:33 2012.

Alternate E's to Church?

Post a New Response

(1142994)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by grand concourse on Sun Mar 4 17:26:45 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by italianstallion on Sun Mar 4 16:46:51 2012.

Like I said earlier, if the V were around and people wanted to swap the V and C: Then they may as well just do a full swap and have the E go to CI and the F to WTC. No point in overusing the W4th switch.

Post a New Response

(1143037)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Joe V on Sun Mar 4 19:00:20 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Mar 4 13:30:16 2012.

6 per hour is fine. I do not see the Rockaway line as a heavy hitter, and not rush hour centric.

Post a New Response

(1143073)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by italianstallion on Sun Mar 4 20:43:59 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by grand concourse on Fri Mar 2 21:16:32 2012.

He's talking about Bway back in the day, pre-Chrystie, when the West End, Brighton and Sea Beach expresses all used Bway.

Post a New Response

(1143086)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by grand concourse on Sun Mar 4 21:00:45 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by italianstallion on Sun Mar 4 20:43:59 2012.

But how were the headways of the trains back then? And were they all 480'-600' trains? I'm not saying it can't happen, but it's not really ideal, imo.

Post a New Response

(1143089)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by J trainloco on Sun Mar 4 21:06:02 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by italianstallion on Sun Mar 4 20:43:59 2012.

Actually, i'm talking post chrystie, when 2 brighton services and West end all shared either the A/B or H tracks on the bridge.

During that time, there were also 3 services using Montague as well.

Post a New Response

(1143090)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Mar 4 21:14:09 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Mar 4 15:36:00 2012.

1) Raise the Fare.
2) Raise the Taxes.
3) All of the Above.

Post a New Response

(1143091)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by J trainloco on Sun Mar 4 21:14:16 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Mar 4 13:30:16 2012.

Hence: rearranging the frequencies. If the F was reduced to 12 tph, that leaves more room for another service. Not saying it's a good idea one way or another, but it is possible. We could all play the wacky service planner game and shoehorn it in, but I doubt anyone could come up with a realistic proposal.

Post a New Response

(1143100)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by grand concourse on Sun Mar 4 21:33:02 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by J trainloco on Sun Mar 4 21:14:16 2012.

No way are you gonna reduce (F) service and get away with it. If this about getting an express service on Culver, then you'd be better off with a or a line that runs with the F to 179th, but just runs express from Jay st to Church av.

Post a New Response

(1143101)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by grand concourse on Sun Mar 4 21:33:02 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by J trainloco on Sun Mar 4 21:14:16 2012.

No way are you gonna reduce (F) service and get away with it. If this about getting an express service on Culver, then you'd be better off with a or a line that runs with the F to 179th, but just runs express from Jay st to Church av.

Post a New Response

(1143102)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by grand concourse on Sun Mar 4 21:33:31 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by J trainloco on Sun Mar 4 21:14:16 2012.

No way are you gonna reduce (F) service and get away with it. If this about getting an express service on Culver, then you'd be better off with a < (F) > or a line that runs with the F to 179th, but just runs express from Jay st to Church av.

Post a New Response

(1143117)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Mar 4 22:59:35 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Railman718 on Sun Mar 4 11:42:36 2012.

That was my point in this whole idea of how we can have a Culver Express.

I don't see where you can have the (F) be the Culver Express under any circumstances because of the Park Slope issue.

Until there are enough cars (which right now obviously is NOT the case, and won't be for several more years at least), things are likely going to have to remain as is on the Culver line, as the only way I can see the express tracks being used full-time is for the (C) to be re-routed there and having the (C) become the Culver Express to Coney Island coupled with the other changes noted. Only then do I see that happening.

Post a New Response

(1143122)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by italianstallion on Sun Mar 4 23:50:21 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by grand concourse on Sun Mar 4 17:26:45 2012.

What about E trains in rush hour with 6tph to CI, running express all the way? The remaining E's stay at WTC. Leave existing F's and G's as is.

Post a New Response

(1143125)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Concourse Express on Mon Mar 5 00:04:43 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by italianstallion on Sun Mar 4 23:50:21 2012.

What about E trains in rush hour with 6tph to CI, running express all the way?

Do you mean to implement this in one direction only? Wouldn't this possibly screw up the (E)'s regularity though (other than extant congestion-related delays)?

my blog

Post a New Response

(1143135)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by grand concourse on Mon Mar 5 02:35:34 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by italianstallion on Sun Mar 4 23:50:21 2012.

Maybe have them run as express as you said. The idea could be to have riders south of Church get on those trains for a quicker ride to Manhattan and leave some more standing room on the regular local trains (or even have some trains start from Church and run local so Park slope riders can have a one seat ride).

I'm only saying if people wanted the C and V to switch, then so should the E and F so that the switches at W4th are not overused. Otherwise I would say everything as is now is best left alone. Only change should be an occasional F express b/w Church and Jay st.

Post a New Response

(1143136)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by grand concourse on Mon Mar 5 02:44:33 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Concourse Express on Mon Mar 5 00:04:43 2012.

My point (see my other reply to italianstallion) would've been a total switch south of W4th (E/F C/V).
So basically the F would become the frequent line and the E might become less reliable due to the longer route (then again, they could short turn some E trains at 2nd av to keep the Queens bound headways as close as possible).

Post a New Response

(1143140)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by MainR3664 on Mon Mar 5 07:05:44 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Mar 3 10:48:28 2012.

That's interesting- the junction at W4 being a "flying" junction. I thought crossing an 8th Ave trin to and from the F would be a problem, hence my disagreement with ideas to run the C to Culver. But if the C can cross efficiently at W4th, then it can provide the local to Chruch while the F runs express...



Post a New Response

(1143141)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by MainR3664 on Mon Mar 5 07:17:29 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Railman718 on Sun Mar 4 11:42:36 2012.

I guess the loss of the R44s hurt things, huh?

Post a New Response

(1143145)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Concourse Express on Mon Mar 5 09:22:34 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by grand concourse on Mon Mar 5 02:44:33 2012.

So (E) to CI and (F) to WTC or Euclid (or do you mean switching them at the Queens end)?

I saw your other post and with regard to this I agree that it might be better to leave the W4 pattern alone. This pattern might have been possible when the old (V) was around and just begging for expansion, but not with the new (M); the only way in that case IMHO is to add a third 6th Ave lcl service which I don't think is a good idea.

my blog

Post a New Response

(1143153)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Mar 5 11:25:06 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by grand concourse on Mon Mar 5 02:35:34 2012.

The E and F are on express tracks. No need to change them, and the express tracks do not have a flying junction (or any junction) at W4st.

The LOCAL tracks do have a flying junction, and either *all* 8th Avenue Locals could go via Rutgers, with all 6th Avenue Locals going to Chambers WTC and no switched need be touched.

OR... Send the (F) to Coney Island via Rutgers/McDonald and the (M) to Euclid via Cranberry. Then you would send the (C) to Metropolitan via Houston Street and the (E) to Chambers WTC. The wear on the switches is negligible, The merging of trains is and issue, but manageable.

In any event the LION has not yet pronounced his definitive decision.

ROAR

Post a New Response

(1143157)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by grand concourse on Mon Mar 5 12:13:37 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Concourse Express on Mon Mar 5 09:22:34 2012.

E and F stays the same in Queens, just different southern terminals.

Agreed, the new M complicates such a total swap. Although the C could be combined with the M (new line from 168th to Metropolitan, either as the C or blue M), but I don't want to get that far off topic. But that take us back to square one where the Culver segment will still have only one line serving it.

Post a New Response

(1143159)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by grand concourse on Mon Mar 5 12:20:13 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Mar 5 11:25:06 2012.

I would still prefer to avoid the unnecessary mergers and prefer an 'all or nothing' swap.

Funny you should bring up the C to metropolitan. If the C were to do that, 71st to Euclid as the M* could run 10 car trains. Now whether that M would need to run as many trains or not is another matter as I would believe Queens needs more service vs the Brooklyn end.

*the post Chambers St fire V service.

Post a New Response

(1143160)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Concourse Express on Mon Mar 5 12:46:00 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by grand concourse on Mon Mar 5 12:13:37 2012.

A (C)/(M) combo introduces new issues (the chief one being rerouting the (M) away from the heart of Midtown) and, as you said, brings us back to square one on Culver.

I still maintain that, until either demand for 8th Ave service is significant or the SAS is built with provision for expansion via the Bklyn IND (many, MANY years away at least), either run the short-turn (F)s express or leave well enough alone.

my blog

Post a New Response

(1143167)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Mar 5 13:06:57 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by J trainloco on Sun Mar 4 21:14:16 2012.

Queens Blvd and Hillside Ave needs every single F train it can fit onto the express track.

Post a New Response

(1143168)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Mar 5 13:07:49 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Mar 4 21:14:09 2012.

2 very unpopular political choices there. Not gonna happen.

Post a New Response

(1143169)

view threaded

Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !

Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Mar 5 13:09:21 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Donít cut (G) train extension !, posted by italianstallion on Sun Mar 4 23:50:21 2012.

A complicated solution to a non-problem.

Post a New Response

[1 2 3 4 5]

< Previous Page  

Page 2 of 5

Next Page >  


[ Return to the Message Index ]