|
|
| (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction (1150668) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
| (1150677) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 14 01:49:59 2012, in response to (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by Gold_12TH on Sat Apr 14 01:11:00 2012. You have to wonder if the demand will be enough once station construction is complete to make the (M) a full-time line to 71-Continental, or at least somewhere in Manhattan overnights and weekends.Maybe they can also lengthen the platforms to 600' during the time the stations are closed as part of a long-term plan to eventually have all Eastern Line stations handle 10-car trains. |
|
|
| (1150679) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Sat Apr 14 02:06:02 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 14 01:49:59 2012. "Maybe they can also lengthen the platforms to 600' during the time the stations are closed as part of a long-term plan to eventually have all Eastern Line stations handle 10-car trains."One can only hope... but with the MTA, that's probably doubtful. And they'd need to do some serious rebuilding around Metropolitan av to extend that platform and move the switches "north*". *;) @ randyo. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1150729) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Apr 14 10:13:22 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 14 01:49:59 2012. I just don't see them extending to Forest Hills on weekends - too much money. What could happen is simply tighten up J/M intervals from 10 to 8 or 9 minutes.The 6th Avenue line gets short-changed on weekends. All the Manhattan trunk routes get 3 services on weekends, and have them all on weekrnds. The 6th Avenue line has 4 services on weekdays, but loses 2 of them on weekends. |
|
|
| (1150878) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Apr 14 19:59:34 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by Joe V on Sat Apr 14 10:13:22 2012. If there was a way to terminate in Manhattan it would make sense, but as you said, I don't know if it would make sense to run the full route all the way to Forest Hills.That said, it's kind of ridiculous that Queens Blvd only has one local on the weekends, at least during the day. |
|
|
| (1150882) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sat Apr 14 20:28:28 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by grand concourse on Sat Apr 14 02:06:02 2012. And they'd need to do some serious rebuilding around Metropolitan av to extend that platform and move the switches "north*".Compared to Essex st, that's actually the easier station to extend the platforms for... They can probably cheaply eek out 9 cars for the entire route except Metropolitan (possibly even cheaper if they're willing to have the first 5' of train past the platform). So what they should do for the most "bang for the buck" is put a huge budget into making Metro 10 cars, have these station renovations accommodate 10 cars, then have the rest of the M 9 cars. For contingency purposes lengthen Canal St. to 9 cars and have rerouted Ms skip Bowery and Chambers (relaying at Chambers). As stations are renovated lengthen them to 10 cars, and eventually the M can be the 'pilot project' for standard length eastern division trains. |
|
|
| (1150884) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Apr 14 20:33:17 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by grand concourse on Sat Apr 14 02:06:02 2012. There's no need for that. The line can handle more service, and extra trains if needed. It's the L line that needs the 600' trains since it's pretty much at capacity. |
|
|
| (1150903) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Apr 14 21:29:00 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Apr 14 20:33:17 2012. The L wouldn't be that hard to extend platforms (perhaps easier than many of the BMT lines already done). The vast majority of it's stations are side platform stations which are easier to extend than island platforms. |
|
|
| (1150913) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Sat Apr 14 22:27:13 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sat Apr 14 20:28:28 2012. I agree. |
|
|
| (1150914) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Sat Apr 14 22:31:56 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Apr 14 20:33:17 2012. But you can only run so many trains. And with longer trains you can move more ppl at a time as well as spread out the crowds.But as I said, this being the MTA, I doubt they'd extend the platforms as it 'isn't necessary'. That's why the L was short trains after the R143 order was done with the increase of ridership in Brooklyn. The MTA does stuff that doesn't really take future options into consideration. I still hope at the Franklin S stations are expanded to hold at least 300' trains when those stations are reconstructed again. |
|
|
| (1150915) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Sat Apr 14 22:35:55 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Apr 14 19:59:34 2012. Exactly, even having the G run is better than just the R. If people just uses them to get to the express, then that makes the G useful in ferrying riders to the express. I don't see the need for the M to run outside of Brooklyn on weekends. |
|
|
| (1150955) | |
Re: Franklin Avenue Shuttle/Idea for extension to Myrtle Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Apr 15 08:25:50 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by grand concourse on Sat Apr 14 22:31:56 2012. And speaking of the Franklin shuttle:As noted before, I would be looking there to extend those platforms to at least 480 feet AND go back to two tracks for that stretch with Franklin Avenue made into a through station. Then, with a renovation/rebuild of the upper level of Myrtle Avenue and a connection built between Franklin Ave and Myrtle, you can then have my previously suggested "Black V" that would absorb the Franklin Shuttle as well as the weekend-overnight (M) shuttle, running from Metropolitan to Coney Island as a local and allowing the (Q) to run as a 24/7 express to Brighton (with the B switched to a local to Coney Island on the Brighton portion on weekdays). That's how I would handle that. |
|
|
| (1150973) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Apr 15 10:29:55 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Apr 14 19:59:34 2012. Since the Queens-bound J can switch to the side track at Essex, then relay the M at Essex middle track. |
|
|
| (1150988) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Sun Apr 15 12:09:42 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by Joe V on Sun Apr 15 10:29:55 2012. I guess it would be possible...but I meant further uptown rather than only one statikn in. I dont know if it would be worth the money to just extend the M just a few stations fom myrtle-bway to essez....and this coming from a once regular m rider that had to deal with the m shuttle all the time. |
|
|
| (1151001) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Apr 15 12:34:30 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Apr 14 21:29:00 2012. Indeed. IIRC, the Canarsie line was able to handle 8 car trains of BMT standatds, meaning they have to be over 500 feet long already. |
|
|
| (1151039) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Apr 15 16:46:00 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Apr 15 12:34:30 2012. What about all the structures and crap they have placed on the Rockaway Pkwy platform ? Could it handle a 9 car train today ? |
|
|
| (1151042) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Apr 15 16:50:05 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by gp38/r42 chris on Sun Apr 15 12:09:42 2012. Anything more, which is minimally 8 car trains to Queens Plaza, I think would be too costly and a non-starter.Essex St extension would allow you to keep your seat until Essex, save 5 minutes, where most transfer to the F anyway. It also reduces the load factor on the J. Extending 4 car OPTO trains to Essex would take up another 2 train-sets. It would be a cheap enhancement, but requires Union approval. |
|
|
| (1151058) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Apr 15 17:28:33 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by Joe V on Sun Apr 15 16:50:05 2012. Essex St extension would allow you to keep your seat until Essex, save 5 minutes, where most transfer to the F anyway. It also reduces the load factor on the J. With the M only going to Essex, it wouldn't be much different than when it ran on Nassau. Most people got off the M at Wyckoff to take the L, and I would still do that if it only went to Essex. The M to the L to some other line is faster than the M to a transfer along the Nassau line, that's why so many people got off at Wyckoff. I did it myself when I was a regular user. The only reason the New M is popular is because it's a direct one seat ride to Midtown. If it only ended at Essex, the L once again becomes more popular. |
|
|
| (1151075) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Apr 15 18:48:00 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Apr 15 12:34:30 2012. They have to be about 536 feet long today, as they were able to handle 8 car trains of 67 foot cars. Let's be conservative, and say 530 feet, so to make it 600 feet, would only be about 70 feet. That's not that much in the scheme of things, especially with the majority of them being side platform stations. |
|
|
| (1151118) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Apr 15 21:37:09 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by Joe V on Sun Apr 15 16:46:00 2012. That station could be extended south for a bit. |
|
|
| (1151163) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by North-Easten T/O on Mon Apr 16 06:39:12 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sat Apr 14 20:28:28 2012. They don't have money to give us workers a rase, so do you think they have the money for this? |
|
|
| (1151169) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Apr 16 07:17:42 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by North-Easten T/O on Mon Apr 16 06:39:12 2012. Capital improvements are completely different than operation costs. |
|
|
| (1151173) | |
Re: Franklin Avenue Shuttle/Idea for extension to Myrtle Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Mon Apr 16 07:50:18 2012, in response to Re: Franklin Avenue Shuttle/Idea for extension to Myrtle Avenue El, posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Apr 15 08:25:50 2012. I like this idea in theory. I also liked your idea about the M/V combo, and I never thought it would actually happen. In fact, most of us felt that way.Since the M/V combo DID occur, maybe I shouldn't doubt you. But having said that, I don't see Central Brooklyn residents being receptive to a new elevated train structure-even a modern one- being built. The fact that people use existing facilities doesn't mean nIMBYs want new ones. Seems inconsistent, but that's life sometimes. |
|
|
| (1151178) | |
Re: Franklin Avenue Shuttle/Idea for extension to Myrtle Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Apr 16 08:08:07 2012, in response to Re: Franklin Avenue Shuttle/Idea for extension to Myrtle Avenue El, posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Apr 15 08:25:50 2012. Why would they send the M from Metropolitan to Coney Island, when that's not even it's route during the week? Talk about confusing passengers. |
|
|
| (1151192) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Mon Apr 16 09:07:20 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Apr 16 07:17:42 2012. That's correct they throw money away in other places when it comes to operations though. THAT money could be used in other places,hey what do I know I'm just an hourly. |
|
|
| (1151198) | |
Re: Franklin Avenue Shuttle/Idea for extension to Myrtle Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by monorail on Mon Apr 16 09:58:25 2012, in response to Re: Franklin Avenue Shuttle/Idea for extension to Myrtle Avenue El, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Apr 16 08:08:07 2012. 'Talk about confusing passengers. 'they've been confused for years.... |
|
|
| (1151201) | |
Re: Franklin Avenue Shuttle/Idea for extension to Myrtle Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Apr 16 10:21:17 2012, in response to Re: Franklin Avenue Shuttle/Idea for extension to Myrtle Avenue El, posted by monorail on Mon Apr 16 09:58:25 2012. This is true, but seriously, what lines have a TOTALLY different route on the weekends than it has during the day? YOu see expresses do locals and stuff like that, but never a totally different route destination. |
|
|
| (1151202) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Apr 16 10:22:26 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by Railman718 on Mon Apr 16 09:07:20 2012. yes. The waste is absolutely astonishing (as it is with any government agency), but that said, as mentioned, personnel costs are completely different sources than capital improvements. |
|
|
| (1151353) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by HANDBRAKE on Mon Apr 16 20:24:36 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sat Apr 14 20:28:28 2012. And somehow also lengthen East NY Yard to store/service 600' trains. |
|
|
| (1151356) | |
Re: Franklin Avenue Shuttle/Idea for extension to Myrtle Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by HANDBRAKE on Mon Apr 16 20:51:12 2012, in response to Re: Franklin Avenue Shuttle/Idea for extension to Myrtle Avenue El, posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Apr 15 08:25:50 2012. I have used the Brighton line to go to work, and for transport into Manhattan on weekends for over 30 years. Q service today is the best that it has been in years, and suffices without the need to add weekend Express services.With longer train intervals typical on a weekend schedule, as compared to a workday, it does not pay to run express trains that will only manage to get riders quickly to a transfer point where they will then have to wait for a local to reach their destination stop. Essentially "Hurry up and wait." R160 equipment on the Q has made Brighton local service bearable, even during the rush hour. In the years prior to the Christie Street cut opening, all Brighton line trains ran local between Prospect Park and Brighton Beach during the mid day hours of the work week, while using old and slower equipment. As long as R160's continue to serve the Brighton, service and speed will remain at a high state of operation. Now if R46 & R68's were used on the Q, then I see running times potentially slipping to the left We are no longer in the pre-1950's era when private automobile ownership was no where close to what it is today. With widespread ownership of the private automobile for transportation, Coney Island may not be one of the primary places to go to these days. |
|
|
| (1151759) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Apr 18 19:39:49 2012, in response to Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by HANDBRAKE on Mon Apr 16 20:24:36 2012. Sidings at Crescent & 11th too ?What about Broad Street and Chambers Street stub tracks ? Also be a bitch to move that interlocking north 10 feet. |
|
|
| (1151763) | |
Re: (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Wed Apr 18 19:50:51 2012, in response to (M) Train Stations See Ridership Jump & Brace for Construction, posted by Gold_12TH on Sat Apr 14 01:11:00 2012. "Don't you worry, madam. You won't recognize the place when we're through! All right, men, get to work!" |
|
|
