|
|
| Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders? (1309655) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
| (1309660) | |
Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders? |
|
|
Posted by n6 limited on Wed Aug 27 00:58:38 2014, in response to Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders?, posted by Gold_12th on Wed Aug 27 00:46:11 2014. They should have just added a J transfer station @ Uunion Ave and removed the two nearest ones. They have no foresight. M ridership increased because they merged it with the V and created a useful line, before they treated the M like a stepchild also. |
|
|
| (1309663) | |
Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders? |
|
|
Posted by The silence on Wed Aug 27 01:49:48 2014, in response to Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders?, posted by n6 limited on Wed Aug 27 00:58:38 2014. The problem with having foresight is it's a gamble. Most of the time, people are said to have only had foresight when they turn out to be correct. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1309664) | |
Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Wed Aug 27 01:50:59 2014, in response to Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders?, posted by The silence on Wed Aug 27 01:49:48 2014. Heh. EXCELLENT point! :) |
|
|
| (1309702) | |
Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders? |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Wed Aug 27 13:07:24 2014, in response to Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders?, posted by Gold_12th on Wed Aug 27 00:46:11 2014. I knew this was going to come up eventually. |
|
|
| (1309703) | |
Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders? |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Wed Aug 27 13:08:53 2014, in response to Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders?, posted by n6 limited on Wed Aug 27 00:58:38 2014. That was the idea but the cost was too high. |
|
|
| (1309733) | |
Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders? |
|
|
Posted by Newkirk Images on Wed Aug 27 15:08:20 2014, in response to Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders?, posted by Gold_12th on Wed Aug 27 00:46:11 2014. I don't understand how the walking transfer technically works. How does your Metrocard know if you are exiting one station for a free transfer and not riding for the first time which deducts $2.50 from your card.Anyone know ? Bill Newkirk |
|
|
| (1309738) | |
Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders? |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Aug 27 15:18:34 2014, in response to Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders?, posted by Newkirk Images on Wed Aug 27 15:08:20 2014. It works like a bus-subway transfer. The card records when and where you use it, and if it detects a use less than 2.3* hours ago at a location from which a transfer is valid, it does not charge you again.*Yes, the limit is 2 hours and 18 minutes. |
|
|
| (1309741) | |
Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders? |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Aug 27 15:23:39 2014, in response to Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders?, posted by Newkirk Images on Wed Aug 27 15:08:20 2014. The Metrocard stores the last time the card was used and if it was used within the 2 hour window, it should allow the second use with no additional charge. If the card shows no usage within that 2 hour window such as the first usage that day, then it will deduct the fare. |
|
|
| (1309777) | |
Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders? |
|
|
Posted by The Silence on Wed Aug 27 19:35:47 2014, in response to Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders?, posted by Newkirk Images on Wed Aug 27 15:08:20 2014. In short, the turnstiles at the station where such a transfer is in effect are programed to take the free transfer already encoded on the card when the fare was originally paid at another station, even thought that transfer would only be for a bus ride.That means if you already used your transfer, say you took a bus to the subway, then this kind of transfer is no longer open to you for free and you must pay a second fare. |
|
|
| (1309937) | |
Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders? |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Fri Aug 29 01:42:25 2014, in response to Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders?, posted by Gold_12th on Wed Aug 27 00:46:11 2014. Why not?They (MTA) made up this so called policy to fit in a tidy neat little box just to deal withisues Like this one to claim their hands are tied.. Whats stopping them from changing the rules or making a amendment? Nothing. |
|
|
| (1309949) | |
Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders? |
|
|
Posted by merrick1 on Fri Aug 29 08:40:15 2014, in response to Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders?, posted by Gold_12th on Wed Aug 27 00:46:11 2014. I don't understand why the MTA thinks they will lose so much fare revenue. I doubt if many people without unlimited MetroCards are using the out-of-system transfer now. They are probably using a less convenient route.I suppose there will be some fare revenue lost because people going to the neighborhood near the stations will be able to make a round trip on a single fare but many such local trips can be made now using the subway one way and a bus the other way. |
|
|
| (1309957) | |
Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders? |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Fri Aug 29 10:09:41 2014, in response to Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders?, posted by merrick1 on Fri Aug 29 08:40:15 2014. I'm thinking that it goes back to the days of the Franklin Avenue shuttle transfers, and the Third Avenue bus transfers. There were "unsavory guys" on the streets selling bus/subway transfers and other criminal stuff going on! That is why there are limits on the use of MetroCards at the same station, etc. It is to cut down on a "policy-created" criminal enterprise, but they really do not WANT to say that publicly.The MTA got itself out of that kind of business, and it does not really want to go back to such an affair. The creation of physical within the paid-zone fare transfer passageways removes the problem. The F-train transfer at 63rd Street, I think, was a concession since the MTA did itself remove a transfer from the F-train direct to the #6 trains at 51st Street. One of the early and endearing complaints about the planning & building of the IND system was the creation of very few transfer points between the then "newer" subway and the existing older subway lines. The new 63rd Street stations re-created that complaint. Remember in the beginning of the F-train traveling on 63rd Street, and the new V-train on 53rd Street - it was strongly suggested that F-train riders who needed to transfer at 51/53 Street simply take the V-train. The limited G-train out of system transfer was a concession due to the tunnel outage. From one point of view - it is not about restoring something that used to be there. The counter-argument - is that it to create something that should have been. That argument is really a rebuttal to the original planners of the IND who often did not want connections to the older lines, but to eliminate the older lines. Mike |
|
|
| (1309967) | |
Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders? |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Fri Aug 29 12:22:47 2014, in response to Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders?, posted by Edwards! on Fri Aug 29 01:42:25 2014. IAWTP. |
|
|
| (1309969) | |
Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders? |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Aug 29 12:37:10 2014, in response to Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders?, posted by Edwards! on Fri Aug 29 01:42:25 2014. Why wasn't the loss of revenue an issue when they added the Bleecker northbound transfer? They first make their decision and then decide what their policy is and look for a reason to support that policy. |
|
|
| (1309987) | |
Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders? |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Aug 29 15:11:16 2014, in response to Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders?, posted by Michael549 on Fri Aug 29 10:09:41 2014. While the original plan for the IND was to have it compete with the private companies, by the time IND construction was started, Hylan was no longer mayor and the attitude toward the privates eased to the point that the BMT was actually offered the new lines to operate. The BMT refused to operate them at the current 5 cent fare which the city would not allow to be raised, so the city ended up becoming a transit operator. At that point with unification also not to far in the distant future, the mood was now to complement the existing lines rather than compete. |
|
|
| (1310061) | |
Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders? |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Sat Aug 30 00:47:51 2014, in response to Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders?, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Aug 29 12:37:10 2014. Until the physical transfer to the uptown #6 at Bleecker Street was created for the Broadway-Lafayette Street, there was NO cost-free easy ability to transfer directly to the uptown trains. There were no paper transfers or approved out-of-system transfers between those stations, unless a person decided to use their own unlimited MetroCard for a "transfer". All that was suggested involved a convoluted time consuming trip via subway.The creation of the uptown transfer allowed much better usage of the subway lines. Folks headed for the eastside from the B, D, F or M lines from Brooklyn could easily take trains closer to their destinations rather than making convoluted trips. The new uptown transfer eased the problem of reaching the A and C trains when they are re-routed over Houston Street during a GO. Transferring between the #4 and #5 trains and the A and C trains was a major hassle when the A and C trains were re-routed. Such an occurrence happened plenty of times at nights and on weekends, then my usual work times. While some transit fans marvel at the engineering of the IND system, they forget that the oldest transfer for the longest time between the original IND lines in Manhattan to the #4 and #5 trains was Fulton Street. (The second transfer option was the downtown #6 in the 1950's to the IND at Bleecker Street, and later in the 1980's the 51/53rd Street transfer station.) Attempting to use the old downtown only transfer to the IND lines, for me made a convoluted time consuming trip to travel up to 14th Street (from Bowling Green) and back down on the #6 to catch to the A or C trains to Brooklyn when there was a G.O. on the A and C lines. Making backward-forward trips to West 4th Street due to a GO was not a pleasure when all that one really wanted to do was get to Brooklyn to get to their job on time, or for the trip home after work. Just to be clear there is still no direct transfers between the A, C, or F lines in Brooklyn to the #2, #3, #4 or #5 lines. Years ago for work trips to Brooklyn, I'd use my own unlimited MetroCard to make a "transfer" between the R-train at Lawrence Street and the A and C trains at Jay Street, well before the physical transfer was built. No more convoluted trips via West 4th Street for me. A person's "elected MetroCard transfer" is not a reduction in revenue, or creates a potential "policy created criminal activity". The previous policy of the 1970's to use paper transfers (more used on buses, and some subway usages) required more interactions with the token booth clerks and orange exit doors. The gold MetroCard did away with all of that activity, creating less of a potential for "policy created criminal activities", and less potential for loss of revenue. Just my thoughts. Mike |
|
|
| (1310661) | |
Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders? |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Sep 3 13:05:46 2014, in response to Re: Making free walking transfer permanent for (G) (J) (M) (Z) riders?, posted by Michael549 on Sat Aug 30 00:47:51 2014. I was not debating the usefulness of the new transfer so I do not understand your post. In fact it shoud have been done generations earlier.I also do not understand your first sentence that there a "No cost free easy ability to transfer uptown" and your statement that except for monthly passes, there was no out of system approved transfer. Those statements say opposite things. If an extra fare was required prior to the physical transfer being concluded, and I believe there was, then an extra fare was required and revenue lost unless someone was willing to first ride downtown to Brooklyn Bridge before proceeding uptown. So back to my original question of why this wasn't considered a factor when deciding that a free transfer northbound woud be allowed, when it is a factor for the G train? |
|
|
