|
|
| Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? (1348110) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
|
|
| (1348111) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by The silence on Thu Apr 16 01:21:52 2015, in response to Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 16 01:09:42 2015. Why does the 4th ave line need three services in the middle of the night?Do you ever consider the costs of what you're suggesting? |
|
|
| (1348116) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Thu Apr 16 02:11:29 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by The silence on Thu Apr 16 01:21:52 2015. With the exception of the 4 stops that the R-train services completely by itself, the Whitehall Street-95th Street R-train that you are proposing would share everyone of its other stops with the D and N midnight hour trains.Mike |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1348125) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Thu Apr 16 06:51:06 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Michael549 on Thu Apr 16 02:11:29 2015. Not all with the D. |
|
|
| (1348126) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 16 06:58:01 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Michael549 on Thu Apr 16 02:11:29 2015. What it would do is allow the (D) and (N) to be express in Brooklyn, in the case of the (N) before running via the Tunnel to Manhattan and the (Q) to go back to running over the Bridge in the overnights.I posted that after reading the complaints in other threads on those waiting forever for the (R) in the late evenings and it occurred to me it may be time to make such changes. |
|
|
| (1348150) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by The silence on Thu Apr 16 09:38:03 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 16 06:58:01 2015. They are complaining all the time about the R. Making it longer and the only local will not fix it. |
|
|
| (1348151) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Thu Apr 16 09:45:53 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 16 06:58:01 2015. I think they are moving away from late-night express service as much as possible. The Q express on Broadway in Manhattan was recently made local late nights. The 3 runs express to Times Square at night mainly because it is the only convenient place to turn it. That leaves the D in Manhattan and the F in Queens as the only services running express at night for the sake of running express. The Q using the Manhattan Bridge is different than a normal express run, it was always considered a separate route from the one through the Montague Tunnel, and the R stations in lower Manhattan really don't need two services at night.What they should do with the R nighttime shuttle is make sure it is timed for quick connection to the N at 59th St. That is, a southbound R should leave 59th St. a minute or two after a southbound N, and arrive there northbound a minute or two before a northbound N. If this could be done reliably (and I don't know to what extent it is currently done at all), they wouldn't even need to run the R shuttle to 36th St. for connection with the D. (Similarly timed connections should be done with the Rockaway Park shuttle and the A at Broad Channel.) But as long as the R shuttle does run to 36th St., and skips 53rd and 45th Streets northbound, the fact that it skips them should be noted on the subway map. |
|
|
| (1348155) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Apr 16 09:54:30 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Dyre Dan on Thu Apr 16 09:45:53 2015. I think they are moving away from late-night express service as much as possible.Thank goodness. In rush hour the stops at local stations take forever. But late night they really aren't much of a delay. Overall travel time of the entire population is reduced on lines where people have two local trains every 20 minutes compared to one express and one local. (Assuming of course the two locals are properly spaced.) |
|
|
| (1348163) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by VictorM on Thu Apr 16 11:05:23 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Dyre Dan on Thu Apr 16 09:45:53 2015. The R shuttle would have to run single track if it ran only to 59 St since there are no crossover switches between north and southbound tracks there. Checking the schedules, I see a southbound R shuttle is scheduled to leave 59 St 6 minutes after a southbound N, while a northbound shuttle is scheduled to arrive at 59 St 3 minutes before a northbound N, assuming the trains are on time (a big assumption!). |
|
|
| (1348169) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Thu Apr 16 12:29:11 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 16 06:58:01 2015. It is perfectly understandable to be concerned about complaints of long waits for train service.At times such as these, I think it is good to make complaints to the MTA, and to local political folk, as well as news media folk - all in the effort to apply pressure to fix documented problems. In this case the solution could be to improve the timings and schedule of the R-shuttle especially for the riders who do not have the alternative of the local N-train. For the past couple of decades, the MTA has reduced its midnight service offerings to be as minimal as possible, while attempting to relieve some of the long wait times, and provide connecting services. Of course will there be the occasional hiccup? Yes! Different solutions have to come into play when the occasional "hiccup" becomes an on-going affair. So far this does not seem to sound like such a situation. Mike |
|
|
| (1348189) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Apr 16 14:36:42 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by The silence on Thu Apr 16 01:21:52 2015. And in any event, what purpose would it serve to have the trains end at Whitehall Street? Lots of people from Brooklyn getting on the SI Ferry at night? |
|
|
| (1348247) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Apr 16 20:05:56 2015, in response to Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 16 01:09:42 2015. At one point, the director of service planning for the NYCTA stated that the MTA was committed to returning 24/7 R service through to Queens once the work in the 60 St tunnel, which was the reason Queens R service was dropped in the first place, was completed. So much for that promise. |
|
|
| (1348251) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Apr 16 20:10:36 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by randyo on Thu Apr 16 20:05:56 2015. A 24/7 full R service is a distraction to what irritates 99% of the R line's passengers: shitty service all day long from sloppy operations for which somebody(s) ought to be getting fired. |
|
|
| (1348257) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Thu Apr 16 21:33:06 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Joe V on Thu Apr 16 20:10:36 2015. The R should be replaced with separate services.An extension of the J line for Fourth avenue service(Jamaica to 95st)... a revised W line from the West End for Broadway Local service(Astoria to 9th avenue or Bay Parkway) and a rerouted N line to 71 ave. N/Q Broadway Express..N becoming the 24HR 60TH st/Queens Blvd local/Bway Exp..Q from Coney Island to 96th st(when completed) W Broadway Local,and (you guessed it)new R service as the Bway Local shortline service from Whitehall to Astoria... Q service will still operate to Astoria until Second avenue is open. J will operate all times. |
|
|
| (1348272) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by K. Trout on Thu Apr 16 22:10:44 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Edwards! on Thu Apr 16 21:33:06 2015. Wouldn't Jamaica to 95th St have the same problems as Forest Hills to 95th St? Something goes wrong in Queens and Brooklyn service is screwed. OK, so there's less room for Manhattan mishaps, but is it really worth it? |
|
|
| (1348288) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by TheGreatOne2k9 on Fri Apr 17 01:03:11 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by randyo on Thu Apr 16 20:05:56 2015. 24/7 (R) to Queens (in exchange for the (G) cutback to Court Square) was on the 2007-2008 service improvements list until budget cuts stopped it. |
|
|
| (1348289) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Fri Apr 17 01:18:39 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Dyre Dan on Thu Apr 16 09:45:53 2015. IAWTPThe main thing I hate about connecting services is having to wait. If they can time it so that the wait is small or nonexistent (including delaying the shuttles in case the originating train is late) it would make it much more tolerable. |
|
|
| (1348295) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Q46 LTD Glen Oaks on Fri Apr 17 02:19:30 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by K. Trout on Thu Apr 16 22:10:44 2015. That all depends... if the line goes down N/o Essex, do we have a place to turn trains so that Bay Ridge still has service to/from Manhattan?I don't think see it being worth the loss of 2 cars on the 4th av local (s/o of 36 St) because it banks on them also being okay with having direct access to Nassau St over Broadway. What happens to the Z? |
|
|
| (1348296) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Q Brightliner Harry on Fri Apr 17 02:47:14 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Edwards! on Thu Apr 16 21:33:06 2015. I agree that to make 4th Av. local service more reliable, it needs a shorter route. But marrying the R with the J does not make for a much shorter route. Instead, what I suggest, is keeping the J as is but running the R through Nassau St. to Atlantic Av. on the Canarsie line. That station would have to be restored with crew quarters, a capital expense but relatively not a big deal. The R would be fully local. An additional benefit would be allowing the J/Z to run express from Broadway Junction giving a more attractive alternative to E train riders boarding in Jamaica. Rolling stock could be maintained at East New York. Yes, 8-car trains would be used on the R. Question is, would the MTA have enough rolling stock? |
|
|
| (1348297) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Fri Apr 17 02:49:01 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Q46 LTD Glen Oaks on Fri Apr 17 02:19:30 2015. Z terminate at Broad st...The dynamics of the two line would change for the better. The Z would become the J as it is now..same rush hour service..but with expanded rush hour operations. Also,with expanded service, express service between ENY and Myrtle will live once again. |
|
|
| (1348298) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Fri Apr 17 02:59:22 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Q Brightliner Harry on Fri Apr 17 02:47:14 2015. A revised RJ...Sounds good..but rebuilding Atlantic is a capital expenditure. I would just relay the line at Broadway Junction using the yard leads. |
|
|
| (1348301) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Fri Apr 17 03:58:07 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Q46 LTD Glen Oaks on Fri Apr 17 02:19:30 2015. They can always turn at Essex. There's also Bway Junction, maybe even Myrtle Ave. |
|
|
| (1348309) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Apr 17 07:29:49 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Edwards! on Thu Apr 16 21:33:06 2015. So tell NYCT and let us know what they say, LOL. |
|
|
| (1348311) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Fri Apr 17 07:38:40 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Q Brightliner Harry on Fri Apr 17 02:47:14 2015. I would simply run the J/Z to 95th Street, and cut the R back to Whitehall Street.Nassau Street is nearer to more offices than Trinity Place. Those headed north of Canal Street can transfer to any of a number of other trains at Pacific, Dekalb, Lawrence/Jay, Fulton, Chambers, or Canal Street. The J/Z is pretty smooth sailing compared to what flairs up on the current R route, which is poor interfacing with the Q and N at 49th Street and whatever shenanigans happen on the Queens Blvd Line. Since the TA has shown no interest in improving the situation themselves, their hand must be forced. |
|
|
| (1348314) | |
Re: Extending (J) late nights to 95th Street in place of (R) |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Apr 17 07:49:35 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Edwards! on Fri Apr 17 02:49:01 2015. I like that idea:Also think at least in late-night (if only then), extending the (J) to 95th Street-Brooklyn (effectively combining it with the (R) in Brooklyn and lower Manhattan) would work and serve the same purpose, especially since such an extension would allow for three connections between the Lexington and 7th Avenue lines from Bay Ridge (Atlantic Avenue and Court Street in Brooklyn and Fulton Street and Manhattan), another to the full Lexington Line (Chambers) and the Lex local (Canal) and the Broadway line at Canal Street. |
|
|
| (1348320) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Apr 17 08:48:08 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Apr 16 14:36:42 2015. No, but at South Ferry, they can get the (1) as well as the M15 for the east side.The (R) to Whitehall late nights is really about being able to make other transfers, including the IRT at both Atlantic Avenue and Court Street and the (A) / (F) at Jay Street-Metrotech. Whitehall is just the easiest place to terminate such a line. |
|
|
| (1348326) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Fri Apr 17 10:00:35 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Joe V on Fri Apr 17 07:38:40 2015. Since the TA has shown no interest in improving the situation themselves, their hand must be forced.How? *curious* |
|
|
| (1348334) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Fri Apr 17 12:22:56 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by fdtutf on Fri Apr 17 10:00:35 2015. It needs political involvement. The politicians are already aware of the daily shenanigans on the #7. |
|
|
| (1348351) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Apr 17 13:42:15 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Edwards! on Fri Apr 17 02:59:22 2015. Good idea. Rebuilding Atlantic would require construction of an addition track and island platform which should have been done anyhow. |
|
|
| (1348352) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Apr 17 13:53:21 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Edwards! on Thu Apr 16 21:33:06 2015. The problem with returning the R to Astoria is that it deprives the line of convenient access to a workable storage and maintenance facility. |
|
|
| (1348427) | |
Re: Atlantic Avenue (L) Station |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 18 03:30:11 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by randyo on Fri Apr 17 13:42:15 2015. Absolutely, and as I would do it, the Atlantic Avenue Station would be rebuilt to where:The outer "local" tracks would be used mainly for through trains. This would allow for perhaps a scenario where the a new line (perhaps a full-time (Z) train) replaces the (L) to Rockaway Parkway and runs weekdays to Broad Street with the (J) and late nights in place of the (R) to 95th Street in Brooklyn. This also could allow in the future for an SAS Line off the Broadway-Brooklyn line and Willy B that runs this route. The inner "express" tracks would mainly be used for trains that short-turn with it as the terminal. In this setup, it could be used so the (L) could be truncated to Atlantic Avenue where it can better cover the more heavily traveled portion of the line (late nights and other times when capacity would not be an issue, the (L) in this setup would still go to Rockaway Parkway. The old Snediker Avenue platform would also be rebuilt, but mainly for storage and also to terminate trains as needed. That to me would make for more efficient use as it was very short-sighted to tear down the old structures in 2005. |
|
|
| (1348433) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Apr 18 08:41:37 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by AlM on Thu Apr 16 09:54:30 2015. Overall travel time of the entire population is reduced on lines where people have two local trains every 20 minutes compared to one express and one local.Agreed, but important to keep in mind that it is for this very reason that local service is a service expansion, increasing operating costs, especially when running times have been increased to the point of requiring another train-set and crew in action. If the F ran local on Queens Blvd at night, that would be an extra 12 minutes round trip, making the need for another train-set and crew likely. The D running local on both 6th Ave and CPW would add about 10 minutes round trip, so that would be more hit-or-miss but they would probably add the train-set and crew just to be safe. Can anyone enlighten me about the 3 train overnight? Does a train immediately turn back north upon arriving at Times Square, or is there a 20-minute buffer? If the former, which is what I suspect, then making it a local on 7th Ave would make not adding a train-set and crew really difficult, if not impossible, to maintain frequency. |
|
|
| (1348440) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Apr 18 10:02:10 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Apr 18 08:41:37 2015. I agree that running local is a service expansion, but it is a relatively inexpensive one. It's also good for revenue - the more people think of the system as being truly available 24 hours per day, the more people will use it in cases where driving is another option. |
|
|
| (1348451) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Lance52 on Sat Apr 18 12:10:55 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Joe V on Fri Apr 17 12:22:56 2015. Political involvement =/= something actually getting done. Take, for instance, the L-line shutdown that is currently in place nights and weekends until mid-May. Despite several politicians making a stink about the line being suspended for such a long period, there still aren't any trains running past Bedford Av. |
|
|
| (1348452) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Lance52 on Sat Apr 18 12:23:05 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Joe V on Fri Apr 17 07:38:40 2015. You're ignoring a couple of major problems with that suggestion.There is more demand for Broadway service from 4th Avenue over Nassau St. That's why the M only ran during rush hours to Bay Parkway while the R ran all day, every day. Switching the J and R will force more people to transfer to other lines for continuing service, thus adding more time to their commutes. While the J might run smoother on Jamaica and 4th Ave, its riders won't save any time over the current option of the R. Secondly, shenanigans, as you put it, happen everywhere. Trading one long line for another might sound good on paper, but when something happens on the Jamaica line, as it's wont to happen, we'll be in the same predicament we're in with the R right now. I'm not against bringing another line down 4th Avenue to help the R, but the J cannot be the only line serving 4th Ave because the R has the tendency to get bogged down by interlining services. |
|
|
| (1348463) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Apr 18 14:01:37 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Lance52 on Sat Apr 18 12:23:05 2015. The R route has to be broken up.The J has far better OTP than the R coming down from Forest Hills. As for people headed up Broadway beyond Canal from 4th Av, I highly doubt many sweat out the R beyond Dekalb, if they stay on that far. It is too damned slow. |
|
|
| (1348496) | |
Re: Atlantic Avenue (L) Station |
|
|
Posted by jabrams on Sat Apr 18 18:07:39 2015, in response to Re: Atlantic Avenue (L) Station, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 18 03:30:11 2015. As I keep on commenting, my solution would have been to leave everything between B'way Junction and Atlantic unchanged. Tear down the Snediker Ave. portion and reroute the Manhattan bound L to the forth track arriving on the outside of the middle platform (which would now be the east N/B platform. Brooklyn - bound L trains could terminate on the inner platform if necessary, where the K used to terminate. Canarsie residents will not stand for a two or three train ride into Manhattan, if a shuttle is run between Atlantic and Rockaway Parkway. |
|
|
| (1348506) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Kriston Lewis on Sat Apr 18 20:23:38 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Joe V on Sat Apr 18 14:01:37 2015. The J has far better OTP than the R coming down from Forest Hills.And why do you think that's the case? |
|
|
| (1348534) | |
Re: Atlantic Avenue (L) Station |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Apr 19 07:04:47 2015, in response to Re: Atlantic Avenue (L) Station, posted by jabrams on Sat Apr 18 18:07:39 2015. It would NOT be a shuttle between Atlantic and Rockaway Parkway as I would do it:My plan would be this: (L) would be truncated to Atlantic Avenue to better serve the more heavily traveled portion of the route and would use the inner "express" tracks to terminate (except late nights and other times capacity is not an issue at Rockaway Park, when the (L) would still terminate there). (Z) would become a full-time line via Canarsie to Atlantic Avenue and then via the Broadway-Brooklyn line to Broad Street with the (J) at all times and late nights would be extended to 95th Street-Bay Ridge via Montauge to replace the (R) in Brooklyn (with the (J) in late nights also possibly extended to 95th Street). This would also allow the (J) during rush hours to run express in the peak direction to Broadway Junction while the (Z) handles local between Marcy Avenue and Broadway Junction. |
|
|
| (1348539) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Lance52 on Sun Apr 19 08:45:38 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Kriston Lewis on Sat Apr 18 20:23:38 2015. I believe the assumption is that, without all of the merging the R has to contend with on Broadway and Queens Blvd, the J should run smoothly from Jamaica to Bay Ridge. That ignores the problem that a longer line, making almost all stops, will still have a lot of the same problems the R does right now. The only difference is that this hypothetical J line would only have to merge with one other line during most times. |
|
|
| (1348542) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Sun Apr 19 10:15:19 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Apr 18 08:41:37 2015. The nighttime 3 relays south of Times Square, then comes back into the station to stop at the northbound platform. I don't know how long that takes, but it has to take some time. I think they want to make sure there are across-the-platform transfers both from the southbound 3 to the local 1 and 2, and from the (northbound) 1 and 2 to the northbound 3. Otherwise, they could terminate the 3 southbound at 96 St. at night, and still have two services serving the line between there and Times Square. But if they did that, some transferring passengers would have to cross over from one platform to the other. (Also, I don't think the R62a cars have "96 St." listed as a southern terminal.) |
|
|
| (1348546) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sun Apr 19 11:14:34 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Dyre Dan on Sun Apr 19 10:15:19 2015. If that's the case, then I guess there are a full 20 minutes allotted from when the train arrives from the north and to when it departs again to go back. As long as the relay doesn't really take that long, then perhaps the 3 can run local on 7th Ave without requiring extra personnel or equipment. |
|
|
| (1348569) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Abba on Sun Apr 19 14:57:02 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Dyre Dan on Sun Apr 19 10:15:19 2015. I believe they do have 96th st as a terminal rollsign |
|
|
| (1348596) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Sun Apr 19 20:16:07 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by New Flyer #857 on Sun Apr 19 11:14:34 2015. That's what I always wondered. Why not make the night #3 a local and keep the #2 on the express tracks? That way, you can run the #3 around the SF loop and start it wherever you wish! |
|
|
| (1348626) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Mon Apr 20 02:54:25 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Elkeeper on Sun Apr 19 20:16:07 2015. I suppose the intent on making the #3 a full-time train at least for Harlem, meant that a useful terminal for the #3 was needed. I do not believe that the MTA really wanted to create a whole new full-fledged mid-night hours route for the #3 train.The previous midnight hours back/forth #3 shuttle operation (from 148th Street to 135th Street) involving transfers with the #2 train, as well as the shutting down of the #3 line and bus substitution were rather problematic. There were many complaints about the bus substitution, which was seriously not liked by Harlem residents, while the back/forth #3 shuttle operation had it own set of issues. Sending the midnight hours #3 from 148th Street to Times Square was the best compromise, it provides better service for Harlem residents with useful transfers, helps handle crowds at Times Square, and does not tie-up #2 local service. The basic problem with midnight hours express service is that transfers between local and express trains can result in lengthy late night trips due to missed connections. While midnight-hour local only routes can be perceived as lengthy trips due to the many stops, such trips often only take a few extra minutes compared to their usual day-time travel times, while benefiting many. This seems to be one of those cases to leave well enough alone. Mike |
|
|
| (1348630) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Mon Apr 20 05:23:57 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Abba on Sun Apr 19 14:57:02 2015. I know 96th-Broadway is on the rollsign of north terminals, but is it on the roll of south terminals? Anyway, Times Square can be busy quite late at night, so maybe keeping the 3 running as it now does is justified. |
|
|
| (1348643) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Mon Apr 20 09:40:22 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Elkeeper on Sun Apr 19 20:16:07 2015. Well, no, I meant that the 3 can run 7th Ave Local at night if it kept its Times Square terminus. Extending to South Ferry will require increased resources no matter what (unless you envisioned the 1 as ending further north, which would probably not go over well with 1 riders).But. . .I'm looking at the track maps. Is it even possible to run the 3 local on 7th Ave and relay at Times Square? It doesn't look possible to switch all the way across to relay from southbound local to northbound local. So this may all be moot. |
|
|
| (1348649) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Mon Apr 20 10:46:50 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by New Flyer #857 on Mon Apr 20 09:40:22 2015. No. When the 3 has to run local, it is extended one more stop to 34 St. |
|
|
| (1348681) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Apr 20 16:03:56 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Michael549 on Mon Apr 20 02:54:25 2015. Years ago, the midnight Lenox shuttle ran between 145 St and 96 St. Prior to the west side resigning and the platform extension at 96 St there was a tail switch between the exp tks just S/O 96 St station. Lenox shuttles arrived on the S/B exp tk and relayed S/O the station. When the platforms were extended, the switch was within the station limits and was removed. It would actually still be possible for #3 service to be turned at 96 St by utilizing the diamond Xover N/O the station. In the early part of the operation, trains could be Xed over the the N/B exp tk to make it more convenient for N/B passengers transferring from trains arriving from lower and midtown Manhattan. Depending on when through Lenox service starts up, the operation could remain that way all night or sometime after 400 AM, the operation could be reversed and the Lenox shuttles could be brought in on the S/B exp take ac Xover to the N/B tk for the return trip making a more convenient transfer from Lenox passengers to through trains downtown since that would now be the time frame when S/B passenger loading would be expected to be greater than N/B. The signal arrangement at 96 St does allow for such a moves as they are fully signal protected. |
|
|
| (1348683) | |
Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street? |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Apr 20 16:11:39 2015, in response to Re: Time to consider extending late-night (R) train to Whitehall Street?, posted by Dyre Dan on Mon Apr 20 05:23:57 2015. Imposted a way that Lenox shuttle can be turned at 96 St. I do believe, however that midnight #3 service can and should extended through to 34 St where it could utilize the middle track to stub end there like the Gs do at Court Sq. Since the T/O would be able to change ends by walking on the platform instead of through the cars and trains would not have to be fumigated like they are at T/Sq, any additional time added to each trip would be minimal and in all likelihood, wipe;d not increase the time between the train’s arrival and departure at T/Sq. It would have that advantage of providing direct access to Lenox service for passengers entering from Penn Station without having to transfer from a through train from downtown at no, or at worst, minimal expense. |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
