|
|
| Re: (RL) train service still sucks (1321532) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 3 of 3 |
||
|
| (1322483) | |
Re: (RL) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Thu Nov 6 15:08:27 2014, in response to Re: (RL) train service still sucks, posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Nov 6 07:49:40 2014. At one time I posted my ideas for the N, Q and R services and a restoration of the W-train.At that time and even now I still would have both the N & Q trains travel their respective routes in Brooklyn, travel over the Manhattan Bridge and up Broadway as an express to and across 63rd Street, with both lines terminating at the 96th Street terminals (or whatever extension terminal are built). At that time, and even now would have the current R-train serving Queens, Manhattan and Brooklyn as it currently does. At that time and I still support the idea of creating the W-train. The W-train would operate from Astoria Blvd, across 60th Street and operate as the Broadway local to Whitehall Street. To increase the number of W-trains serving Astoria some W-trains could be terminated/relayed at the Canal Street/City Hall set of layup tracks, and some rush-hour W-trains could originate/terminate at the 36th Street/9 Ave set of layup-tracks. The N and the R trains would operate every day from 6am to midnight. While the Q and W trains would operate at all hours. During the midnight hours, the W-trains would be extended as a local along 4th Avenue - South Brooklyn line, and along the Sea Beach line making all local stops. The R-train would have its usual 36th Street to 95th Street midnight hour shuttle operation. This setup would reduce the switching between N, Q and R trains present today in Queens on the 11th Avenue Cut, between 42nd Street and 34th Street, at Prince Street, etc. These track switch mergers would be eliminated that slow down these train lines. The daytime W-trains would normally run from Astoria to Whitehall Street, with put-ins at Canal Street and/or 36th Street to provide the amount of trains Astoria needs for its heavy rush hour ridership. This should reduce the operations on the local tracks that impede the R-train. Of course, the current orange M-train would continue its operations as it does so presently. Anyway, that I my idea and scheme to improve the N, Q & R-trains, but it needs the Second Avenue line to be operational. Mike |
|
|
| (1322486) | |
Re: (RL) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Nov 6 15:29:28 2014, in response to Re: (RL) train service still sucks, posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Nov 6 13:29:07 2014. That may be OK in the AM, but in the PM rush, all service goes through to 95 St so layups have to come back from 95 to 36 and turn on the mainline blocking service. Again, that may be OK for layup purposes, but trains must still be sent all the way to CIY for inspections and maintenance. Also overnight layups stored in 36 St Yd have to come out of the yard and turn on the mainline in order to get to 95 St for AM service so it is still not an acceptable procedure. |
|
|
| (1322495) | |
Re: (RL) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Nov 6 16:12:31 2014, in response to Re: (RL) train service still sucks, posted by randyo on Thu Nov 6 15:29:28 2014. OK, so if the (RR) lives in Queens, were do the trains for 95th Street Come from?ROAR |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1322496) | |
Re: (R) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynTrain on Thu Nov 6 16:16:17 2014, in response to Re: (R) train service still sucks, posted by Larry,RedbirdR33 on Thu Nov 6 13:31:59 2014. Yesterday at 5:15pm, there was a 20 minute wait at 59th St Brooklyn for a Bay Ridge R train, while N trains came regularly every 5 minutes. Crowd was 6-deep at 59th St, with the severely late R train so overcrowded that several people were unable to board. |
|
|
| (1322507) | |
Re: (R) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Nov 6 18:17:58 2014, in response to Re: (R) train service still sucks, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Wed Nov 5 20:32:01 2014. Of course I am not suggesting that for the Sea Beach line. |
|
|
| (1322515) | |
Re: (RL) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Nov 6 20:22:44 2014, in response to Re: (RL) train service still sucks, posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Nov 6 16:12:31 2014. Due to the lack of a yard at the S/E they lay up on the S/B exp tk between 36 St and 59 St. This requires 2 sets of moves. Immediately after the PM rush, R layups are temporarily stored on the N/B exp tk between 59 St and 36 St so that they don’t interfere with exp service N/O 36 St. After exp service stops running, those trains are then relayed to the S/B exp N/O 36 St where they are in position to be AM put ins the next morning and being on the S/B they don’t interfere with N/B rush exp service. |
|
|
| (1322520) | |
Re: (R) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Nov 6 21:29:03 2014, in response to Re: (R) train service still sucks, posted by BrooklynTrain on Thu Nov 6 16:16:17 2014. Better off with an extended J/Z every 5 - 8 minutes. |
|
|
| (1322569) | |
Re: (RL) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Nov 7 10:00:08 2014, in response to Re: (RL) train service still sucks, posted by randyo on Thu Nov 6 20:22:44 2014. So... It is a major complication no matter what you do.LION's Plan will do, since a few layups will do for 95th street after as does before. ROAR |
|
|
| (1322592) | |
Re: (R) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Fri Nov 7 12:57:46 2014, in response to Re: (R) train service still sucks, posted by Edwards! on Thu Oct 30 01:19:41 2014. I agree. Extend the J and or Z... |
|
|
| (1322599) | |
Re: (RL) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by K. Trout on Fri Nov 7 13:27:13 2014, in response to Re: (RL) train service still sucks, posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Nov 6 07:49:40 2014. The Broadway Express trains use the Bridge, and 63rd Street, the Broadway Local uses the Tunnel and 60th Street. Because of this the (N) train, an express, would run via the 63rd street tunnel and out to Continental via queens local. but of course will miss Queens Plaza. Too Bad, so sad. So you've traded one set of merges for another. N trains would block F trains at 63/Lex and M trains at 36th. |
|
|
| (1322626) | |
Re: (RL) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Fri Nov 7 18:19:01 2014, in response to Re: (RL) train service still sucks, posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Nov 7 10:00:08 2014. Without spending any capital money on new yards, what would you do about this ? |
|
|
| (1322632) | |
Re: (RL) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Nov 7 18:39:42 2014, in response to Re: (RL) train service still sucks, posted by Joe V on Fri Nov 7 18:19:01 2014. Some capital money would be required, but not all that much.Trains going out of service at 36th Street move to 9th Avenue Lower Level for fumigation. Dead geese will be directed upstairs, the equipment will move east out of the station to the refuse lead, and revere direction into the yard on a new track build on ground level on what is presently a paved street in the yard, and it will join the existing yard throat. Some inspection, cleaning, and light maintenance facilities can also be built in the yard. ROAR |
|
|
| (1322704) | |
Re: (R) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Sat Nov 8 13:16:29 2014, in response to Re: (R) train service still sucks, posted by BrooklynTrain on Thu Nov 6 16:16:17 2014. I was wondering, just how difficult is it for the train dispatchers and management to divert an N-train to 95th Street (where the N-trains are running like clock-work every 5 minutes), but there's a blockage of R-trains and the platforms are filled with riders waiting for the R-train?Is it that the diverted N-train has to be "abandoned" on the paper work, with the crew sent somewhere else, and then back to where it is supposed to be? Is it that a 20 or 30 or 60 wait for the blockage to clear is just not "Important enough" to warrant "doing something"? Or that a certain level of higher-up management is needed to make such a decision? Or is it that the riders should know that 20 or 30 or 60 wait is just too long, and to go ANYWHERE ELSE, but to definitely not expect the MTA to try to quickly resolve the situation, to get the train traffic moving again? As in, "we don't have to make an announcement", we've already got your money, and if the trains are extremely late & crowded - tough noogies! Just wondering. Mike |
|
|
| (1322707) | |
Re: (R) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by r33/r36 mainline on Sat Nov 8 13:45:57 2014, in response to Re: (R) train service still sucks, posted by Joe V on Thu Nov 6 21:29:03 2014. Or just put 160s back on the line.. the cars are noticeably faster than the older fleet, I heard cases of rides on the NTT being 2 to 3 minutes faster than there SMEE counterparts, plus you don't hear of the 2 line having these delays despite having huge crowds and a long route. |
|
|
| (1322713) | |
Re: (R) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Nov 8 14:30:21 2014, in response to Re: (R) train service still sucks, posted by Michael549 on Sat Nov 8 13:16:29 2014. They need to spot more ready-to-go gap trains at Whitehall, sidings north of City Hall, or 57th Street.This is 1970-era QJ nonsense and it is high time they figured out how to run it. The 60th Street connection to a Southern Division BMT local has been around since 1958, and train volume has never been lower on most of the route. |
|
|
| (1322717) | |
Re: (R) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Nov 8 15:57:25 2014, in response to Re: (R) train service still sucks, posted by Michael549 on Sat Nov 8 13:16:29 2014. N trains certainly can be diverted to 95 St in the event of a serious service disruption on the R and in fact used to be and probably still is SOP. the problem arose when the Gunn/Kiley MTA administration replaced the zone trainmasters with individual line superintendents so that the R can basically go down in flames as long as the N Line supt shows better on time performance and no abandoned intervals. The same used to be true on the Brighton line when there was a delay in Brighton lcl service. Local supervision was instructed to have Brighton expresses make local stops which was often done. Par of that instruction was also that a rerouted exp was to operate through to Stl which was almost never done despite the bulletin to that effect. Ever since operating personnel who had to demonstrate their knowledge of the job by passing an exam were replaced by so called “managers” who often don’t know the subway from a hole in the ground service quality has actually gone down rather than improved. Maybe if the NYCT got rid of the excessive and overpriced line “managers” and returned to the slightly less expensive but more operationally knowledgable trainmasters, reliable service might be able to be restored. |
|
|
| (1322718) | |
Re: (R) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Nov 8 16:00:12 2014, in response to Re: (R) train service still sucks, posted by r33/r36 mainline on Sat Nov 8 13:45:57 2014. I can’t understand what the difference might be in the performance between the 2 types of cars, but even if there were, I don’t recall there being any excessive number of train delays when the ABs and Ds ruled the BMT and they were lot slower than the slowest of the postwar cars. |
|
|
| (1322721) | |
Re: (R) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Nov 8 16:21:42 2014, in response to Re: (R) train service still sucks, posted by randyo on Sat Nov 8 15:57:25 2014. Perhaps the TA is ignoring the issue as it would reveal the line manager nonsense. |
|
|
| (1322722) | |
Re: (R) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sat Nov 8 16:26:43 2014, in response to Re: (R) train service still sucks, posted by Joe V on Sat Nov 8 16:21:42 2014. David Gunn killed off the zone trainmasters bringing in line managers called "superintendants".Several NYCT presidents later, Gunn's re-organization lives on. |
|
|
| (1322723) | |
Re: (R) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Nov 8 16:36:33 2014, in response to Re: (R) train service still sucks, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sat Nov 8 16:26:43 2014. It's like Amtrak's long distance train model, each route has a manager. But it makes no sense when a train such as the R shares a physical route, albeit local/exprsss, with other services most of the way. |
|
|
| (1322732) | |
Re: (R) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by snarf368 on Sat Nov 8 19:03:26 2014, in response to Re: (R) train service still sucks, posted by r33/r36 mainline on Sat Nov 8 13:45:57 2014. The customers along the southern portion of the R line got used to the automated announcements and electronic signs. 50% of the time I ride the R, announcements are made but can be hardly heard. If it's a woman C/R, forget it, no announcements are made at all. |
|
|
| (1322756) | |
Re: (R) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by FtGreeneG on Sat Nov 8 23:44:30 2014, in response to Re: (R) train service still sucks, posted by randyo on Sat Nov 8 15:57:25 2014. It's still done. I've operared on the N line and bc of a delay in R service they sent us through the tunnel/lower manhattan to fill gaps in service. Happens a lot when there's problems on local lines, dispatchers won't hesitate to sent the expresses down the local. And if there's signal problem service gets really funky. |
|
|
| (1322771) | |
Re: (R) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Sun Nov 9 02:02:50 2014, in response to Re: (R) train service still sucks, posted by randyo on Sat Nov 8 15:57:25 2014. Thanks Randyo and the other guys for your explanations.Mike |
|
|
| (1322773) | |
Re: (R) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sun Nov 9 04:14:08 2014, in response to Re: (R) train service still sucks, posted by randyo on Sat Nov 8 15:57:25 2014. N trains certainly can be diverted to 95 StFun Question: Why should N train riders suffer for R train riders? Maybe if the NYCT got rid of the excessive and overpriced line “managers” and returned to the slightly less expensive but more operationally knowledgable trainmasters, reliable service might be able to be restored. FWIW, I get the strange feeling that NYCTA doesn't trust their employees to be able to make that leap from supervision into management. Plus, one could argue that it would end up being a wash in terms of pay* given that you'd need to pay more to compensate for the increased responsibilities of a trainmaster versus being responsible for a line. *If the job is classified as "management", how many people would be willing to give up seniority and overtime for something like that? You could end up with a situation where the people going for the job tend to be younger employees with a degree looking for a way to quickly pump up their pay in lieu of long time employees who may actually be looking forward to early retirement. |
|
|
| (1322776) | |
Re: (R) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Nov 9 07:41:19 2014, in response to Re: (R) train service still sucks, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sun Nov 9 04:14:08 2014. "Why should N train riders suffer for R train riders?"How is N suffering when they run every 6 minutes, a train goes missing south of 59th on the Sea Beach Line, making it 12 minutes for some, due to diversion to 95th, while closing the R train's 20 minute gap, though R passengers delayed further waiting for multiple overcrowded trains ? Who suffers less ? This is line managers, each making their line look good, and not willing to take a hit to help out another service. It then stems from middle management's inability to look beyond metrics, the system overall, and customer service is the farthest thing from their mind. Given the TA's mentality, they should be requested to segment the R route into two since they are too inept to run a service that has run since 1958. |
|
|
| (1322808) | |
Re: (R) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sun Nov 9 13:37:49 2014, in response to Re: (R) train service still sucks, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sun Nov 9 04:14:08 2014. When we had zone train masters the dispatchers told him what they did to deal with service disruptions and it was over.Today the dispatchers (supervisors) are afraid to make decisions because they are often second guessed by the superintendant (manager). Many times dispatchers at gap (non terminal) stations, who deal with a manager from every line, get the spiel "Don't steal one of MY trains for somebody elses' lateness. " Of course, if HIS line is late, well, you know the deal. This is why I tell you guys "Politics rules at MTA." |
|
|
| (1322820) | |
Re: (R) train service still sucks |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Nov 9 15:31:06 2014, in response to Re: (R) train service still sucks, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sun Nov 9 04:14:08 2014. Actually, in terms of trainmaster salary vs “manager” salary, the line manager is a lot costlier than the trainmaster used to be. Also in order to become a trainmaster, a supervisory employee in a qualifying title had to demonstrate actual knowledge of the job before advancing to that position rather than the current method of sucking up to the right people to get the promotion. Supposedly when Gunn/Kiley made the change to replace trainmasters and similar titles with managers it was felt that upper level supervisors and semi managers coming from the ranks of the unions would be more sympathetic to their subordinates. I actually find the opposite to be true since upper level supervisors and such having come from the rank and file know what can be done and who is goofing off and who isn’t much more easily than a so called manager fresh out of college who only knows what a subway train looks like from seeing a picture of one in his/her textbook! |
|
|
|
Page 3 of 3 |
||
