|
|
| Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! (1142591) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 5 |
|
|
|
| (1142596) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by PATHman on Fri Mar 2 15:52:52 2012, in response to Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by Gold_12TH on Fri Mar 2 15:28:01 2012. If the G train had more IRT connections in downtown Brooklyn, it would be more useful. I could care less about a G train extension. However, I'm looking forward to the return of the Culver Express after over 30 years. |
|
|
| (1142598) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by Concourse Express on Fri Mar 2 15:58:39 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by PATHman on Fri Mar 2 15:52:52 2012. Truncating the (G) to Smith-9 serves no useful purpose, especially now that the (G) train's fleet is based in CI yard.However, I'm looking forward to the return of the Culver Express after over 30 years. That's not guaranteed. The new (M) is a smash-hit; don't expect it to go away anytime soon. my blog |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1142604) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by PATHman on Fri Mar 2 16:18:27 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by Concourse Express on Fri Mar 2 15:58:39 2012. I was under the assumption that the G would be the local and the F would be the express (though that would piss off Park Slope residents). |
|
|
| (1142605) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by Concourse Express on Fri Mar 2 16:21:43 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by PATHman on Fri Mar 2 16:18:27 2012. Oh, I see.I agree that Park Slope residents would be in an uproar and that alone could render such a plan DOA... my blog |
|
|
| (1142614) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Fri Mar 2 17:00:05 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by Concourse Express on Fri Mar 2 15:58:39 2012. Imo, all they had to do was give the (V) a few extra trains to run either local with the (F) or run express to Church av and the (V) would've been justified. No one was going to stay on the (V) as it ended in Manhattan.And since the (M) isn't going away, there's no room for another 6th av line. The only way to keep Park Slope riders happy is to keep the (F) as is, but perhaps they could take maybe 1/4 (F) trains for the express? I too hope they don't cut the (G) back, that transfer at 4th av is useful. imo, The problem is that they made 4th av a local stop instead of an express. If it was an express, they could terminate the (G) there especially if they don't intend on having express service on that line. |
|
|
| (1142619) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by MATHA531 on Fri Mar 2 17:13:04 2012, in response to Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by Gold_12TH on Fri Mar 2 15:28:01 2012. ....and of course remember that for a while, they discharged the passengers onthe G at Smith-9th and then ran the trains on the express tracks to turn around at Church Avenue....what sense that made I don't think I understand. |
|
|
| (1142623) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Fri Mar 2 17:21:12 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by grand concourse on Fri Mar 2 17:00:05 2012. How about F skip/stop, like J/Z. Call its alter ego the V. |
|
|
| (1142624) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Fri Mar 2 17:31:00 2012, in response to Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by Gold_12TH on Fri Mar 2 15:28:01 2012. “It means you have to wake up half an hour earlier.”Unless he commutes late nights, that's not possible. |
|
|
| (1142636) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Fri Mar 2 17:50:38 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by Joe V on Fri Mar 2 17:21:12 2012. No, I don't think skip stop should be applied to anything outside of the J/Z. |
|
|
| (1142642) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Fri Mar 2 17:56:47 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by grand concourse on Fri Mar 2 17:50:38 2012. Why not ? |
|
|
| (1142643) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Mar 2 18:02:10 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by Concourse Express on Fri Mar 2 16:21:43 2012. Which is why to me the only way that could happen is this:(C) train is moved in Brooklyn to the Culver line after West 4th and becomes the Culver Express, also replacing the (F) on the Culver El between Church and Coney Island except overnights. (F) remains local to Church Avenue and terminates there except overnights when the (C) would not be running and the (F) would run its current route. (G) would run its current route at all times. (E) would replace the (C) in Brooklyn to Euclid. A new (K) train would supplement the (A)/(C), running the old (AA) route from Chambers-168th with 4-5 tph and 2 tph overnights. |
|
|
| (1142646) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Fri Mar 2 18:08:51 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Mar 2 18:02:10 2012. Can't run both A & C thru Cranberry Street tunnel without delays.There are more A's now than when they last co-habitated in the 1970's. |
|
|
| (1142649) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Mar 2 18:17:25 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by Concourse Express on Fri Mar 2 16:21:43 2012. They could always go back to the 1960s plan of having alternate Fs run local and alternate Fs run express. |
|
|
| (1142658) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Fri Mar 2 18:33:13 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by Joe V on Fri Mar 2 17:56:47 2012. I know no one things of these people when they suggest skip-stop, but it's really bad for people riding from an intermediate stop, to an intermediate stop. |
|
|
| (1142660) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Fri Mar 2 18:39:15 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by J trainloco on Fri Mar 2 18:33:13 2012. Which is why thankfully the 9 was scrapped and the 1 made all stops. |
|
|
| (1142661) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Fri Mar 2 18:40:15 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Mar 2 18:02:10 2012. smh |
|
|
| (1142662) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Fri Mar 2 18:40:20 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by grand concourse on Fri Mar 2 17:00:05 2012. And since the (M) isn't going away,there's no room for another 6th av line.If you rearranged the frequencies of the QB trains, you sure could. The 6th avenue and Broadway express tracks carried 3 services. |
|
|
| (1142663) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by Gene B. on Fri Mar 2 18:41:41 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by PATHman on Fri Mar 2 15:52:52 2012. More IRT connections? I do not believe there are any IRT-IND connections in all of Brooklyn. |
|
|
| (1142664) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Fri Mar 2 18:42:02 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by randyo on Fri Mar 2 18:17:25 2012. About how many (F)s should they run express to appease the Park slope riders? Like 1 out of 4, 1 of 3? |
|
|
| (1142666) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by LRG5784 on Fri Mar 2 18:51:00 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by grand concourse on Fri Mar 2 18:40:15 2012. That's what I said. |
|
|
| (1142667) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by LRG5784 on Fri Mar 2 18:51:41 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Mar 2 18:02:10 2012. Laides and gentlemen, remember, drugs are bad, VERY BAD! Stay away from them!!! |
|
|
| (1142668) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Fri Mar 2 18:52:00 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by grand concourse on Fri Mar 2 18:42:02 2012. About 1 in 6 would be about the upper limit considering how busy the inner local stations are |
|
|
| (1142670) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by LRG5784 on Fri Mar 2 18:52:39 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by Joe V on Fri Mar 2 17:56:47 2012. Ridership along the Culver line is extremely different from the ridership along the Jamaica Line. |
|
|
| (1142671) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Fri Mar 2 18:54:27 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Mar 2 18:02:10 2012. Lol, I love your service plans. They're always as crazy as possible!How's about this: M-168th st/Wash hts to Metropolitan, via Willy B, chrystie, switches to 8th ave local @ W4th. F-179th to WTC, via 63rd/6th ave, switching off its current route @W4th E-parsons or 179th to Coney Island, switching off its current route at W4th. V-71st continental to Euclid, via 53rd/6th ave, Cranberry, Fulton local. E runs 18tph and F runs 12. 6 of the 18 E's run express on Hillside to 179th. Half of the 18 run express in Brooklyn and the other 9 run local and end at Church. |
|
|
| (1142672) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by LRG5784 on Fri Mar 2 18:56:03 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by grand concourse on Fri Mar 2 17:00:05 2012. I honestly think that with the return of Culver Express service, a currently-deceased subway line may rise from the dead....But I'll just sit and wait to see what happens rather than just assume such and such. But yeah, I hope the (G) doesn't get cut back either. |
|
|
| (1142675) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Fri Mar 2 19:13:36 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by grand concourse on Fri Mar 2 18:40:15 2012. I mis-typed. I meant to say A& E |
|
|
| (1142692) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Fri Mar 2 20:14:05 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by R30A on Fri Mar 2 18:52:00 2012. Oic. |
|
|
| (1142694) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Fri Mar 2 20:16:03 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by randyo on Fri Mar 2 18:17:25 2012. If express service is needed and/or would help around there, some variation (1/3, 1/4, 1/2) of the peak-hour Fs can do it. The Orange M appears here to stay, and the users of intermeidate staions really do need direct access to Manhattan.So there will, in all likelihood be no 1970s pattern of Express-F andf Local-G, or any V train coming there. If there's to be express service, it'll have to be a Diamond-F. |
|
|
| (1142700) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Fri Mar 2 21:16:32 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by J trainloco on Fri Mar 2 18:40:20 2012. But those 3 expresses were out of necessity because one side of the bridge at a time was closed. It was the exception and is not how they should run, imo. |
|
|
| (1142703) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by MattW on Fri Mar 2 21:32:38 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by PATHman on Fri Mar 2 15:52:52 2012. Well if it can't help you, screw everyone else right? |
|
|
| (1142714) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Fri Mar 2 22:08:04 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by PATHman on Fri Mar 2 15:52:52 2012. If the G terminates at Smith-9th instead of Church Av, an express is impossible, since it would be relaying on the express tracks.So other than the reason of it being a better service arrangement, even your selfishness should care. |
|
|
| (1142716) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Fri Mar 2 22:13:21 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by Joe V on Fri Mar 2 17:56:47 2012. Simple it comes down to headway... the F at its peak runs 4 min headways to Kings Hwy and Stillwell. The J and Z run combined run 6 (12 min between each J and Z) min headways. So they have the space to do the skip stop service without backing up the line. When you squeeze the headway, when you skip a stop you'll run right into your leader. Thats the problem that was had on the 1/9 skip stop. Also the J/Z runs for 1 hour only. |
|
|
| (1142719) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by Concourse Express on Fri Mar 2 22:35:30 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by ClearAspect on Fri Mar 2 22:13:21 2012. Actually, (J)/(Z) run on combined 5-min headways...my blog |
|
|
| (1142722) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by PATHman on Fri Mar 2 23:33:41 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by MattW on Fri Mar 2 21:32:38 2012. wrong |
|
|
| (1142723) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Fri Mar 2 23:36:13 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by Joe V on Fri Mar 2 18:08:51 2012. Huh? The A and C do both run through the Cranberry St. tunnel. Or do you mean A and E? |
|
|
| (1142729) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by PATHman on Sat Mar 3 00:22:03 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by ClearAspect on Fri Mar 2 22:13:21 2012. Also the J/Z runs for 1 hour only.Which is far too little, especially in the PM when skip stop ends in the height of rush hour. |
|
|
| (1142731) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Mar 3 00:44:13 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by Dyre Dan on Fri Mar 2 23:36:13 2012. I think he meant the A & E.Perhaps select (E) trains in this scenario would still terminate at Chambers, but the bulk would run to Euclid. |
|
|
| (1142732) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Mar 3 00:49:33 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by MainR3664 on Fri Mar 2 20:16:03 2012. That's why I brought up the (C):The (C) could serve as the Culver Express to Coney Island, which would give Park Slope riders (at express stations and actually anywhere after that before West 4th) a new 8th Avenue option they don't currently have where they can make a same-or-cross platform transfer from the (F) if they are looking for 8th Avenue stations. This also gives Coney Island riders a one-seat ride via 8th Avenue they don't currently have. |
|
|
| (1142734) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by Concourse Express on Sat Mar 3 00:54:12 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by MainR3664 on Fri Mar 2 20:16:03 2012. Maybe just have the Kings Hwy short-turns go express (both in the IND and BMT portion of the Culver line) and the rest go local. IINM this works out to one express for every two locals...my blog |
|
|
| (1142735) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by Concourse Express on Sat Mar 3 00:57:36 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by PATHman on Sat Mar 3 00:22:03 2012. I agree with this. (J)/(Z) could use a boost; mayhap 90 min to 2 hours...my blog |
|
|
| (1142741) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Sat Mar 3 04:14:32 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by ClearAspect on Fri Mar 2 22:13:21 2012. From your message: "Simple it comes down to headway... the F at its peak runs 4 min headways to Kings Hwy and Stillwell."I always have to bring this point up - Park Slope residents, and most Brooklyn users of the F-train have trains every 4 minutes during the rush hours. What community would WANT to give that up? That is the basic problem with any scheme that says 1/2, 1/3 or 1/4 of the F-trains should run express - it simply means a reduction of local service at the most used heavily ridership local stations. We have had this discussion before - the basic facts have not changed. There is no way that the any F-train or V-train could run express ON the express tracks IF the G-train terminates at Smith-9th Street. Me - I would really want the G-train to keep its terminal at the Church Avenue station for forever! If the V-train were still to exist, and there were the subway cars to support it, I would have extended the V-train to Church Avenue (both directions) or Kings Highway (peak direction) as the Culver Express route. However as was noted in another forum message, the current M-train is doing quite well in ridership and in satisfying rider needs. Trying to fit F-trains, V-trains, and M-train all on the Sixth Avenue local tracks simply means a reduction in service for one or more of those lines. Would that really be a good thing to propose? The current F-train Brooklyn service pattern, with the G-train running to/from Church Avenue is an optimum service plan - if I were the MTA, I'd keep it. Mike |
|
|
| (1142743) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Mar 3 04:43:11 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by Michael549 on Sat Mar 3 04:14:32 2012. That I would keep, except as noted I would except overnights shorten the (F) to Church Avenue with the (C) brought over from the 8th Avenue line to serve as the Culver Express and except overnights replace the (F) along the Culver El to Coney Island, giving riders at Coney Island a one-seat ride via 8th Avenue they currently don't have and at express stations, Culver riders along Park Slope the same option as well as being able to do an easy same or cross-platform transfer at most express stations between Church and Broadway-Lafayette in Manhattan (overnights, the (F) would run as it does now). The one potential drawback in this is that the (C), (F) and (M) would all stop on the local track at Broadway-Lafayette, but that to me can be handled since it would only be one stop.As also previously noted, in this scenario the (E) would replace the (C) to Euclid and a new (K) train would run 4-5 tph most hours and 2tph overnights from Chambers-168th. |
|
|
| (1142748) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Mar 3 07:49:11 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Mar 3 00:44:13 2012. Yeh, I corrected myself a few hours later. |
|
|
| (1142761) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Mar 3 09:51:30 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by J trainloco on Fri Mar 2 18:33:13 2012. But if that's the vast minority, then it really shouldn't matter. Plenty of north-south bus services in Brooklyn such that people aren't hopelessly tied to the Culver Line for intra-Brooklyn service. |
|
|
| (1142762) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Sat Mar 3 09:53:56 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Mar 3 04:43:11 2012. Wallyhorse, unless I've missed something here's what you just proposed:1) On the Eighth Avenue local tracks from 50th Street to West 4th Street there would be the C, E and K trains making all local stops. 2) On the Central Park West local track segment, there would be the B, C and K trains. 3) At Broadway Lafayette Station, there would be C, F, and M trains all using the local tracks. 4) At the Jay Street-Borough Hall station there would be A and E trains on the center tracks, with C and F-trains on the side tracks - because so many folks want 8th Avenue service. 5) Along the Culver line from Bergen Street to Church Avenue, F and G trains would made local stations to/from Church Avenue. This leaves the Church Avenue terminal with its 4-track layup tracks having to terminate and relay all F-trains and G-trains, returning to service F-trains at 4-minute intervals, and G-trains at 10 minute intervals. A mighty task considering that the 179th Street terminal now devotes two levels of 4-tracks each to the task. At the Brooklyn end, the current F-train uses the Kings Highway, Avenue X, and Coney Island stations to "pump" F-trains toward Manhattan. 6) As was noted several times on the forums, the MTA has a subway car shortage - the noted reason for NOT extending the V-train to Church Avenue and other proposed changes. So the MTA would have to come up with extra trains for the C-train (extended to Coney Island), the new K-train, and the E-train (extended to Euclid Avenue). Just to be clear on what you have proposed. Mike |
|
|
| (1142763) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Mar 3 10:48:28 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by Concourse Express on Sat Mar 3 00:54:12 2012. There is no need for an express out on McDonald Avenue.1) The express cannot go to Coney Island, but only to Kings Highway. 2) It is far better to give the stops along McDonald more service than to give them an express that does not stop there. 3) An express north of Church is possible IF AND ONLY IF a local (such as the (C) (via Rutgers to W4 thence onto 8th Ave). 4) The (G) [(GG)]{☺} cannot provide this service because it has no return connection to the (F), but only a complicated trans platform transfer to the (A) at H-S. 5) The notional (C) train cannot switch to the 8th Avenue line at Jay Street since that would entail using a crossover that would delay all service. The crossover at W4th is a flying junction without delays. 6) IF any express were to be run, the the (GG) MUST terminate at Church and cannot foul the express tracks as was done heretofore. 7) That siad, LION thought that the (GG) was going to make it's permanent home at Church as there are crew quarters and potties there. ROAR |
|
|
| (1142764) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Sat Mar 3 11:17:04 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Mar 3 10:48:28 2012. IIRC, they have express runs below Church to allow for the extra trains the (F) needs for rush hours. Ideally there should be an express north of Church to allow riders south of Church a faster way to Manhattan and bypass Park Slope. |
|
|
| (1142770) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Mar 3 12:23:12 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by grand concourse on Sat Mar 3 11:17:04 2012. Yes, they used to do that, LION is aware, but LION said the EXPRESS ends at King's Highway and the LOCAL continues to Coney Island. Dumb arrangement, but they are the ones who built it that way.Why would anybody want to pass Park Slope? That is where the passengers are, (The Loud Noisy Passengers with Politicians in their pockets). YET *they* are the ones who wanted "Express" service, knowing that they lived at a local stop. I guess what they really wanted was a fresh empty train with empty seats on it. But the (GG) train would NOT help them, so if this were to happen, they would need a new Manhattan Service starting at Church. ROAR |
|
|
| (1142773) | |
Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension ! |
|
|
Posted by LRG5784 on Sat Mar 3 12:26:08 2012, in response to Re: Straphangers to MTA: Don’t cut (G) train extension !, posted by grand concourse on Sat Mar 3 11:17:04 2012. That's only select service though. It's not on the schedule for trains to run express.Ideally, having an express train below Church Avenue would be an alternative over those who use the other South Brooklyn express lines. It's something that should definitely be looked into. |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 5 |
|
