|
|
| Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? (1377833) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 10 of 15 |
||
|
| (1384687) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Feb 7 13:26:38 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Union Tpke on Sun Feb 7 11:15:30 2016. LION said to think OUTSIDE of the BOX, not outside of the UNIVEWRSE! |
|
|
| (1384689) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Feb 7 13:27:55 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced, posted by Union Tpke on Sun Feb 7 11:42:11 2016. Outside of the box and all over the floor.LION not even going to read that. |
|
|
| (1384690) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sun Feb 7 13:31:58 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Feb 7 13:24:58 2016. That cuts 10 tph from the QB local through 60th Street and adds 5 through 53rd Street.1. The QB local trains are full enough that such a cut in service is unacceptable. 2. A fair number of people on QB actually want to travel through 60th street tunnel, not 53rd street. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1384700) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sun Feb 7 14:00:11 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by randyo on Sat Feb 6 20:27:14 2016. I specifically left off route designations to make it clear that the northern termini can be anywhere. If the aforementioned plan was adopted, which I'm not saying it should be, the 95th St service would probably be the B or D, not the R. If the B or D go to 95th St then the yard issue is taken care of (Concourse).You are left with three services to Broadway: West End, Sea Beach, and Brighton. One goes to Queens Blvd, the other two to Astoria (until SAS, but SAS is a separate issue). |
|
|
| (1384705) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sun Feb 7 14:05:52 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced, posted by merrick1 on Sun Feb 7 11:54:39 2016. There is such a thing as signage. It's used around the world. Like more ordinary systems that close overnight.Not sure why MTA doesn't use signage for existing part time routes (other than to say "eves" "wknds" "nights" and other inexact words or abbreviations that tell nobody when the first and last trains are). |
|
|
| (1384716) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sun Feb 7 14:29:14 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced, posted by Union Tpke on Sun Feb 7 11:42:11 2016. Now we're putting north terminals in a drum spinning it and pulling out a piece of paper; then putting south terminals in a drum, spinning it and pulling out another piece of paper and seeing what combos we can pull out.Utterly ridiculous. Next we'll have the A going to 95. TA suits reading this thread are ROTFLTAO. |
|
|
| (1384718) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Sun Feb 7 14:32:53 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sun Feb 7 14:29:14 2016. I am not advocating this! I am pointing out how hard it is to sort out this mess! |
|
|
| (1384719) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sun Feb 7 14:33:03 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sun Feb 7 14:29:14 2016. If it makes sense operationally and fills passenger needs it really doesn't matter how "out there" the ideas are.Should Brighton riders ever want more Montague access (such that they want to give up their 6th Ave service in exchange for a Montague one), then a 4th Ave local D train to Bay Ridge should definitely in turn be considered to alleviate switching and still fill all the need. Right now it may not apply, but Brighton riders one day wanting more Montague access is a relatively realistic concept, something much more likely to happen in my lifetime then, say, the entirety of the SAS being built or many of the other fantasies we throw around here. |
|
|
| (1384720) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sun Feb 7 14:36:33 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sun Feb 7 14:29:14 2016. The better answer, of course, is gut half or more of the speed timers, run more frequency faster, and quit miss outs in the evenings--such as the oft cited no R for 30-45 minutes. Short answer, shape up service. The combinations would't matter if connection were quickand reliable. |
|
|
| (1384721) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Sun Feb 7 14:38:50 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by AlM on Sun Feb 7 13:21:32 2016. As I said when I first brought up the original topic, a few months ago there was a lot of discussion of the idea, and its related aspects. Since then there have been variations on the ideas also discussed - you'll see those variations in Broadway Lion's, Wallyhorse's and other folks suggestions.The one thing that "we" are good at here on this forum is debating transit stuff. Here there is "right", "allow-able", "you've got a point", "okay its possible", "that's not what I'd do", all of the way to: "have you lost your mind?", up to and including, "it's confirmed you've lost your freaking mind!!" (LOL - SMILE) I want the Second Avenue subway to be extended the full length of Manhattan on the east-side with various connections to other subway lines and transit. I want to live long enough to actually that subway to/from 125th Street all the way to South Ferry! I want to live and see this, and have younger transit fans pitch & complain that the Second Avenue Subway "sucks" because it is all local. (SMILE) Every thing else is just "in the mean while". (SMILE) Mike |
|
|
| (1384722) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Feb 7 14:48:02 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced, posted by Union Tpke on Sun Feb 7 11:42:11 2016. Sheesh.There is no need to turn the system upside down for no reason. |
|
|
| (1384724) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sun Feb 7 14:59:15 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sun Feb 7 14:36:33 2016. Absolutely. |
|
|
| (1384725) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Feb 7 15:12:51 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by AlM on Sun Feb 7 13:23:25 2016. It is NOT too many to 96th Street. It will barely be enough.You are competing with the LEXINGTON! You want to draw riders from the upper east side you are going to have to have FREQUENT service, otherwise nobody will use it. 2nd Avenue BROADWAY Express! LION would send all Bway Local service to Astoria, and forget about 71st Street. ROAR |
|
|
| (1384726) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sun Feb 7 15:31:18 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Michael549 on Sun Feb 7 14:38:50 2016. Actually this geezer (71 1/2) will also bitchthat we were cheated out of the proper 4 trck trunk, but I would still be pleased to see it run the whole length of the island AND conmnect to both the Bronx and Brooklyn before I croak.The "underground park" at Essex might make a decent space for the Transit Museum if the SAS gets the proper new tunnel to Court Street. |
|
|
| (1384730) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sun Feb 7 15:54:37 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced, posted by New Flyer #857 on Sun Feb 7 14:33:03 2016. Brighton riders one day wanting more Montague access is a relatively realistic concept, something much more likely to happen in my lifetime then, say, the entirety of the SAS being built or many of the other fantasies we throw around here.The percentage of Brighton riders who want Montage access can't increase. If more office buildings get built in lower Manhattan, it will mean even more office buildings also being built in Midtown. Midtown just has far more capacity for new office buildings because it has so much more area. |
|
|
| (1384732) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sun Feb 7 15:58:17 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Feb 7 15:12:51 2016. Lions aren't very good at math, are they? The number of people who live closer to the SAS than to the Lex doesn't support 20 tph. |
|
|
| (1384740) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Sun Feb 7 16:34:29 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sun Feb 7 15:31:18 2016. good point! |
|
|
| (1384742) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Sun Feb 7 16:47:01 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced, posted by AlM on Sun Feb 7 15:54:37 2016. From a previous message:"The percentage of Brighton riders who want Montage access can't increase." Actually it can, even without the building of more office buildings in the downtown area of Manhattan. There is no iron clad "natural law" or "physical law" or iron-clad constraint that simply can not be "broken" - in this regard. Having an increase in the percentage of Brighton riders who want Montague Tunnel access is certainly in the realm of the possible - it is simply not an "impossible" happening. It simply easy to imagine that there are can be shifts in the composition of workers headed to downtown and their residences, or changes in the locations of work places, etc. For example when the Freedom Tower and other related office buildings opens - it easy to see that workers will be traveling to those new work places - even from Brighton subway stations. There are other office buildings downtown that employ workers from many places - imagine that. I've been told that the days of segregating certain people from certain work places or residential neighborhoods is over with. There is a big difference between "un-likely", "probably not" and "impossible", etc. Mike |
|
|
| (1384744) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sun Feb 7 16:53:01 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced, posted by Michael549 on Sun Feb 7 16:47:01 2016. Of course it's not impossible. It is statistically incredibly unlikely, however. |
|
|
| (1384747) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Sun Feb 7 17:05:36 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced, posted by AlM on Sun Feb 7 16:53:01 2016. From a previous message:It is statistically incredibly unlikely, however. ----- Sorry, but it is not even that. Mike |
|
|
| (1384749) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sun Feb 7 17:08:48 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced, posted by Michael549 on Sun Feb 7 17:05:36 2016. If midtown office construction continues at a greater rate than downtown, which is pretty much guaranteed because midtown has far more available underbuilt land, then the only way Brighton riders could start wanting Montague to a greater percentage is if by some statistical fluke downtown workers congregate their homes around the Brighton Line.Please explain why such an eventuality is not statistically incredibly unlikely. |
|
|
| (1384765) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Sun Feb 7 18:40:05 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced, posted by AlM on Sun Feb 7 17:08:48 2016. Here's your argument: (Numbers)Here's my rebuttal: (Letters) 1) The percentage of Brighton riders who want Montage access can't increase. A) Actually it can increase - simply by the shifts in the composition of workers headed to downtown and their residences, or changes in the locations of work places, etc. There is no iron clad "natural law" or "physical law" or iron-clad constraint operating in this instance. 2) If more office buildings get built in lower Manhattan, it will mean even more office buildings also being built in Midtown. Midtown just has far more capacity for new office buildings because it has so much more area. B) As the Freedom Tower and related office buildings open - workers will be traveling to those new work places - even from Brighton subway stations. Many office buildings downtown employ workers from many places. The percentage of Brighton riders who want Montague Tunnel access will change. There are several residential developments that are in the planning stages for Brooklyn that could easily tip your percentages. 3) "If midtown office construction continues at a greater rate than downtown, ..." C) You said, "If midtown office construction continues at a greater rate than downtown" - that is an "if statement" which means it is entirely possible for, "midtown office construction to NOT continue at a greater rate than downtown". If one is to concede the possibilty of the positive "if statment", one also has to consider the negative of the "if statement". You're only looking at the positive statement. 4) You said in part, "..which is pretty much guaranteed because midtown has far more available underbuilt land, then the only way Brighton riders could start wanting Montague to a greater percentage.." D) Nothing is guaranteed, even if mid-town has far more available "under-built" land - other factors can easily influence the usage of much of that "under-built" land - city policy, zoning, real estate market issues, transportation issues, environmental issues, etc. 5) You're saying, "Nope, it is a slam dunk, and I'm right! I can determine the future for all time". "I can determine what people will want." E) I'm saying, "Not so fast!" Are some of your contentions plausible - maybe and maybe not. Definitely not a certainty. My bottom line statement is, "Can the percentage of Brighton riders who want Montage access increase?" Sure it can, simply because things change, neighborhoods change - work locations change, even in ways that can not be predicted. You are talking about things, forces, circumtances that are beyond the control of any kind of "determined force". In the 1970's there were many predictions of the down-fall of NYC and its neighborhoods due to the loss of population and transit ridership. Many of these doomsday predictions were said with certainty and conviction by many critics. Many, many changes over time have taken place in many neighborhoods all over the city. I'm skeptical of the critics who said with absolute certainty that this or that "can't possibly happen." 6) The percentage of Brighton riders who want Montage access can't increase. F) Basically you're arguing that ridership patterns can not change - can not ever change. In this argument you're saying that ridership on a certain segment can not change positively. That is a strange argument on a forum like this - where arguments are repeatedly made on the basis that ridership patterns have changed, and that something different needs to be done. Now if we were living in a country where there are work permits and residential permits that restrict the movement of people and their work places and other activities - then I'd say that you have a better case for certainty. "Can the percentage of Brighton riders who want Montage access increase?" Sure it can! Mike |
|
|
| (1384766) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sun Feb 7 18:51:08 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? Massive Changes Needed if Switching is to be reduced, posted by Michael549 on Sun Feb 7 18:40:05 2016. All your arguments support that your contention is possible. They do not support that your contention has any real likelihood of occurring. |
|
|
| (1384776) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Feb 7 20:43:29 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by AlM on Sun Feb 7 15:58:17 2016. Live Closer? Matters not. I'd walk a little further for the Broadway train IF IT WAS FREQUENT ENOUGH. How often you get a seat on this here LEX? eh?People do NOT choose trains because they are the closest, but because they are going where the want to go, unless, like today's LEX: It is the only game in town. |
|
|
| (1384779) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sun Feb 7 20:47:13 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Feb 7 20:43:29 2016. But the 4/5/6 also go to more office locations than the future Q. |
|
|
| (1384828) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Feb 8 07:52:03 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by AlM on Sun Feb 7 20:47:13 2016. They do not.They do not dew Times Sq, They do not dew NYP/Herald Sq: West side from the east side is a capital idea. ROAR |
|
|
| (1384834) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon Feb 8 09:03:03 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Feb 8 07:52:03 2016. You are mistaken.There is way more square footage of office space between 5th and Third between 33rd and 53rd than there is in the Times Square and Penn Plaza areas. There is also downtown Manhattan. |
|
|
| (1384845) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Mon Feb 8 10:01:23 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Feb 7 15:12:51 2016. FREQUENT service, otherwise nobody will use it.Not sure about that. People will use a service that takes them where they want to go. Lexington does not get people to Times Square, or anywhere near the West Side. Especially underground (away from the weather) people will wait a while for the train that will take them to their desired spot without transferring. The service has to be dependable though, without missed intervals and such. I think the SAS will shine most on weekends. People looking to go have fun in Times Square from the UES will find it easier than ever before. One line suffices. |
|
|
| (1384848) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Mon Feb 8 10:11:31 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Feb 7 20:43:29 2016. People do NOT choose trains because they are the closest, but because they are going where the want to goWhich is why I ask why the SAS wouldn't draw with only one B-division service that takes people where they want to go (western half of Manhattan). It's just one service without much frequency but it's something the people never had before and goes to Times Square. Unfortunately, the Q stops at Union Square and Canal St, both accessible by the Lexington, but Herald Square, Times Square, and 57th St are nothing to sneeze at, and neither are the Broadway Local stops reached with a simple cross-platform transfer. |
|
|
| (1384852) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Mon Feb 8 10:19:32 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by AlM on Mon Feb 8 09:03:03 2016. I agree that the Q is enough for the SAS, but the cross-platform transfer at Lex/63rd can make quite a difference. If I live near, say, 91st and 3rd, and I want to go to, say, 46th and Madison, I think I'd ordinarily go for the Q to Lex/63 for the F to Rockefeller Center rather than deal with the Lexington crowd. |
|
|
| (1384853) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon Feb 8 10:34:08 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by New Flyer #857 on Mon Feb 8 10:19:32 2016. I agree. That's why I definitely did not put the Rockefeller Center area into the 4/5/6 preferred category. |
|
|
| (1384859) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Mon Feb 8 12:54:45 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by AlM on Mon Feb 8 10:34:08 2016. I'm using the Rockefeller Center area as a via point toward the boundaries you outline. |
|
|
| (1384875) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Feb 8 15:44:34 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Feb 7 07:45:43 2016. AM layups going O/S at 36 St certainly can do that, but that is not the problem. The problem is PM layups that go all the way to 95 St and have to come back to 36 St and turn south on the exp tk N/O the station to get to either CIYd or 36 St Yd. |
|
|
| (1384891) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Feb 8 17:53:49 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by randyo on Mon Feb 8 15:44:34 2016. PM layups go out of service at 36th Street. People left on board will have to get off and wait for the next train. They do that at random on the Flushing, at least here a train can be signed up for 36th Street.Furthermore, trains do not need to be fumigated at 36th Street, they will continue on to 36th Street (Upper middle or any of the lower tracks) before a crew takes it into the yard. ROAR |
|
|
| (1384936) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Feb 9 07:47:09 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Chris3117 on Sat Feb 6 02:00:59 2016. What do you do on weekends then?Perhaps while CBTC is being done, you COULD get away with the (E) running local on QB since CBTC work is going to force that on a lot of weekends anyway. Bigger problem there is with the impending (L) shutdown, you likely would need the (W) in this to be at least 19/7 like the (R) if not 24/7. |
|
|
| (1384982) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Feb 9 16:21:03 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Feb 8 17:53:49 2016. I have been not only riding but supervising the Flushing Line during my time with the NYCTA and while AM layups are often randomly swapped off at 111 St, in the pM only the specifically designated willets Pt layups went O/S there. otherwise trains scheduled for Main St went through. As for laying up at 36 St on the R in the PM, that is definitely not doable since passengers from the D and N would be getting off to transfer to the R and would be expecting all Rs to operate through to 95 St. Not operationally feasible. |
|
|
| (1385008) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Feb 9 18:10:30 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by randyo on Tue Feb 9 16:21:03 2016. Meh... Gooses will figgr it out.ROAR |
|
|
| (1385022) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Chris3117 on Tue Feb 9 19:46:52 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Chris3117 on Sat Feb 6 02:00:59 2016. When second avenue subway is done; Make service smooth and efficiently. Switched Terminal Between Astoria and 71st Street Queens.Weekdays: (N) 96th Street/2nd Avenue - Coney Island via Broadway Exp/4th Av- Sea Beach. (Q) 96th Street/2nd Avenue - Coney Island via Broadway Exp/ Brighton Local. (R) Astoria - 95th Street via Broadway Local; all times(New Terminal) (W) Whitehall Street - 71st Street via Broadway local.(New Terminal) Late nights in Manhattan: (N) Broadway Express/4th Av Exp-Sea Beach all the way to Brooklyn via Bridge. Longest Line in Brooklyn; 24/7 (Q) Broadway Local via Bridge.(Late nights only)All times. (R) Broadway Local to 95th Street- Bay Ridge 24/7: Eliminating Shuttle R train in Brooklyn. All times (W) No Service Between Manhattan and Queens Late nights in Brooklyn (D) 4th Av local. 24/7; Stops Dekalb Av.(Late Nights only) (N) 4th Av. Exp and Sea Beach. Skips Dekalb Av.(all times) (R) 4th Av Local 24/7 Leave one 4th Av Express Service in Brooklyn. Weekends no (W) trains in Manhattan. Manhattan & Brooklyn 2 local & 1 express service each. |
|
|
| (1385024) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Chris3117 on Tue Feb 9 19:50:27 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Chris3117 on Tue Feb 9 19:46:52 2016. When second avenue subway is done; Make service smooth and efficiently. Switched Terminal Between Astoria and 71st Street Queens.Weekdays: (N) 96th Street/2nd Avenue - Coney Island via Broadway Exp/4th Av- Sea Beach. (Q) 96th Street/2nd Avenue - Coney Island via Broadway Exp/ Brighton Local. (R) Astoria - 95th Street via Broadway Local; all times(New Terminal) (W) Whitehall Street - 71st Street via Broadway local.(New Terminal) Late nights in Manhattan: (N) Broadway Express/4th Av Exp-Sea Beach all the way to Brooklyn via Bridge. Longest Line in Brooklyn; 24/7 (Q) Broadway Local via Bridge.(Late nights only)All times. (R) Broadway Local to 95th Street- Bay Ridge 24/7: Eliminating Shuttle R train in Brooklyn. All times (W) No Service Between Manhattan and Queens Late nights in Brooklyn (D) 4th Av local. 24/7; Stops Dekalb Av.(Late Nights only) (N) 4th Av. Exp and Sea Beach. Skips Dekalb Av.(all times) (R) 4th Av Local 24/7 Leave one 4th Av Express Service in Brooklyn. Weekends no (W) trains in Manhattan and Queens. Manhattan & Brooklyn 2 local & 1 express service each. |
|
|
| (1385029) | |
N and W to Astoria/ Q to 96th Street! |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Tue Feb 9 20:15:43 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Dec 25 16:33:41 2015. Why not assume that the simplest and most logical service pattern will happen?N/W both change to become exactly what they were pre 2010. Q 96/2 to Coney Island, Express. Local north of Canal Late nights. Simple. Logical. Why break what works? |
|
|
| (1385030) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Feb 9 20:16:17 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Feb 9 18:10:30 2016. The problem is that the geese will get on an R train going O/S and she they figure out the train isn’t going their way, pull the cord and cause delay. 36 St is not a good location to take S/B trains O/S in the PM rush whether they turn at 9 Av or not. Most of the complaints about the R’s unreliability come from the neighborhoods south of 36 St so that is the part of the line that needs more service, not less. |
|
|
| (1385033) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Chris3117 on Tue Feb 9 20:28:12 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Chris3117 on Tue Feb 9 19:46:52 2016. When second avenue subway is done; Make service smooth and efficiently. Switched Terminal Between Astoria and 71st Street Queens.Weekdays: (N) 96th Street/2nd Avenue - Coney Island via Broadway Exp/4th Av- Sea Beach. (Q) 96th Street/2nd Avenue - Coney Island via Broadway Exp/ Brighton Local. (R) Astoria - 95th Street via Broadway Local; all times(New Terminal) (W) Whitehall Street - 71st Avenue via Broadway local.(New Terminal) Late nights in Manhattan: (N) Broadway Express/4th Av Exp-Sea Beach all the way to Brooklyn via Bridge. Longest Line in Brooklyn 24/7; (Q) Broadway Local via Bridge.(Late nights only)All times. (R) Broadway Local to 95th Street- Bay Ridge 24/7: Eliminating Shuttle R train in Brooklyn. All times. (W) No Service Between Manhattan and Queens. (Late Nights only) Late nights in Brooklyn (D) 4th Av local. 24/7; Stops Dekalb Av.(Late Nights only) (N) 4th Av. Exp and Sea Beach. Skips Dekalb Av.(all times) (R) 4th Av Local 24/7 Leave one 4th Av Express Service in Brooklyn. Manhattan & Brooklyn 2 local & 1 express service each. |
|
|
| (1385039) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Feb 9 21:27:38 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Chris3117 on Tue Feb 9 19:46:52 2016. Why do have to keep bumping the same post over and over and over?Why couldn't you at least correct the first sentence to 71 Ave. I also explained to you in length about why the R running between Astoria and 95 is a bad idea which was corrected around 1986 IIRC. Are you even reading this Chris3117? |
|
|
| (1385042) | |
Re: N and W to Astoria/ Q to 96th Street! |
|
|
Posted by zac on Tue Feb 9 21:34:04 2016, in response to N and W to Astoria/ Q to 96th Street!, posted by R30A on Tue Feb 9 20:15:43 2016. I still think the Q will need extra service in order to attract riders off the Lex. 10 minute headways on a Saturday is too long if there is an alternative. 6 minutes in the rush is also too long. I'd say they should run some extras to Canal or Whitehall, but then you have trains crossing all over each other.December 2016? I won't hold my breath. |
|
|
| (1385044) | |
Re: N and W to Astoria/ Q to 96th Street! |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Feb 9 21:38:54 2016, in response to Re: N and W to Astoria/ Q to 96th Street!, posted by zac on Tue Feb 9 21:34:04 2016. IMO the current headway on the Q is sufficient for service to 96th St.It is only a few new stations, the cars are longer than IRT cars and it will not take 1 rider away from the 4/5. The Q and 6 can easily split the crowd from the UES. |
|
|
| (1385066) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Wed Feb 10 01:00:51 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Feb 9 21:27:38 2016. Does it make you wonder if Chris3117 is going to become the new "Wallyhorse?"The kind of guy that is full of enthusiasm in proposing ideas - regardless of much or little logic is involved with each idea - but who will often repeat his ideas - over and over again. I am not knocking the enthusiasm or the willingness to promote ideas - but the repetition without reflection can be a bit much. Where's the give and take in the discussion of ideas and proposals, the reflection and possible changes in proposals based upon new information or other considerations. ---- Just a simple question - for example - just where the N-train goes during the Late nights - what is its terminal stop in Manhattan? Having the R-train return to its Astoria to 95th Street recreates the problem of not having a direct train storage and maintenance facility for the R-train, a problem cleared up in decades ago. No clear reason has been produced by Chris3117 about by the MTA should give up a practice that works. I guess his response will be to simply repeat his listing, again. Mike |
|
|
| (1385069) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Chris3117 on Wed Feb 10 01:38:34 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Michael549 on Wed Feb 10 01:00:51 2016. This will be a same story since 2010; It wasn't smooth service between express and local services; 3 services merging on 60th tunnel including R trains thats why creating traffic and extensive delays: According the recent plan for the future second avenue subway before they cut off the W train it was bad and even now so worst never get saves the time; N train will be diverted along with Q train. |
|
|
| (1385091) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Wed Feb 10 10:40:27 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Chris3117 on Wed Feb 10 01:38:34 2016. You're making it worse. You are saying the N/Q to 96 and R/W via 60th?Astoria ridership is much higher than the current R. The W could not handle it and it would be a stretch to have the same number of W trains as we currently have N/Q trains. |
|
|
| (1385097) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Wed Feb 10 10:53:45 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Wed Feb 10 10:40:27 2016. LION send (*R) to Astoria, LION send as many as Astoria can handle. Max that sucker out. (R) to 95th Street; (RR) to 9th Avenue/39th Street. Once people become accustomed to (RR) service terminating at 9th Avenue; layups there will be no problem. They will know if they are on an (R) or an (RR).As for 71st, Let there be a (W) to Whitehall and let it run every 15 minutes. Those who as want a (W) will know when to go. Otherwise let the (M) handle the load, and increase (M) service as necessary. Perhaps let some (E) trains run as (EE) trains perhaps one every 15 minutes opposite the (W). ROAR LION has spoken, so it will be! ROAR |
|
|
| (1385099) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Feb 10 10:57:32 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Broadway Lion on Wed Feb 10 10:53:45 2016. LION has spoken, so it will be!Lion had better avoid the crowd at Queens Plaza waiting for a train through the 60th street tunnel, or he will become lionburger quite quickly. |
|
|
|
Page 10 of 15 |
||
