|
|
| Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure (1392515) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 4 of 7 |
||
|
| (1393860) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Thu Apr 28 17:43:31 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 28 17:10:35 2016. Stop harping on something that simply is not valid. There are not sufficient numbers of people coming from the 14th St or Bway El corridors heading to 63rd or farther north on the UES. The priority is getting (L) passengers across the river. Next order is doing so in the most cost and logistically effective manner possible. Your foamer routing does not meet the criteria. I, and others, have pointed out to you the fatal flaws in your plan. Accept it and stop trying to convince people you are somehow right. |
|
|
| (1393862) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Apr 28 17:47:56 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Thu Apr 28 17:36:39 2016. I would suspend CBTC work on the QB line for the duration of the 14th Street tunnel rebuilding. One massive GO is enough. |
|
|
| (1393865) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Thu Apr 28 17:50:24 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by AlM on Thu Apr 28 17:15:05 2016. I suspect that those will be the (L) folks who don't/won't take the el. Going via the (G) could well work out taking longer to reach Manhattan than the southerly route. First, there's the travel time from Lorimer to Court Sq. Then, the time getting from the (G). Then, the (E)(M)(7) are all pretty full by that point. Coming up the 6th Av route might work better for most. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1393872) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Thu Apr 28 18:08:42 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Joe V on Thu Apr 28 17:47:56 2016. I concur. It would be nice having additional QB local service nights/weekends. However, I don't think it would be absolutely necessary. The way service has been routinely borked with GOs for the last 20 years, people have become accustomed to disruptions and delays.Unless QP itself is OOS, weekend frequency would not prevent (M) from turning there if there is work going on up the line. If QP is inaccessible, it could turn pretty much anywhere between Essex and Queensbridge. Heck. If they're going to totally fustercluck the QB mainline and make QP inaccessible on a recurring basis, they should just set up 23rd-Ely to function as a terminal when necessary. Otherwise, the only Manhattan access from the (G) would be the (7)...and that can't handle it alone. |
|
|
| (1393881) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 28 18:42:00 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Thu Apr 28 18:08:42 2016. Maybe, but you also underestimate how densely populated the UES is:Having 6-7 TPH on the (T) at ALL TIMES (except overnights when it would be 3 TPH) would be a very helpful supplement to the (Q), especially for those looking for midtown. The (Q) and (T) would be stopping one block apart from each other between 23rd and 57th Streets (plus of course the transfer at 34th) and especially for those looking for midtown, having the option helps. This also doubles service on the UES late nights and weekends in one of the most densely populated areas of the entire country. As said, this (T) I would actually implement well ahead of the (L) closure because it's a line that on its own would likely be very much warranted IMO. |
|
|
| (1393882) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 28 18:48:27 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Thu Apr 28 17:50:24 2016. Exactly!!That is why I would split the (M) into (M) and (T) since it would also likely mean fewer trainsets would be necessary on the split line since 96th/2nd is a lot closer than 71-Continental. That's also why I also encourage people to take the (G) the other way to either the Broadway-Brooklyn OR the area around the Atlantic Terminal with new OOS transfers at Broadway (for the J/M/Z) and Fulton Street, Lafayette Avenue for the (C) and Atlantic Avenue for the 2/3/4/5/B/D/N/R/Q, especially those going to lower Manhattan. |
|
|
| (1393883) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 28 18:53:13 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Joe V on Thu Apr 28 17:30:10 2016. Yes, but there are a lot of people who reverse commute and again, the number of high rises on the UES is huge and only getting bigger in the upcoming years. Many of those who do have to travel in rush hour peak direction ahead of reaching the UES when things quiet down considerably, something I think being overlooked.Also overlooked is the fact the UES is so densely populated that you have people out and about and likely going to/coming back from places very frequently. Lets say on weekends having twice as many trains that go directly to Macy's from the UES for example is one of many things that I think will prove popular. That's also why I do it this week. |
|
|
| (1393885) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Apr 28 19:08:20 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 28 18:53:13 2016. Who living on the UES wants to go to Canarsie ?Flagship Macy's is at Herald Square. Nobody in Canarsie wants to go to Bloomingdales. (nor do I, and I have one in my mall 3 miles away). |
|
|
| (1393886) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Apr 28 19:09:16 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 28 18:42:00 2016. The SAS will be a grand ridership disappointment with just the Q train. |
|
|
| (1393891) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 28 19:46:01 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Joe V on Thu Apr 28 19:08:20 2016. You miss the point:The idea is, in my format, BOTH the (Q) and (T) would be going by Macy's, and the return trip would be easier in most cases to get the (T) back than the (Q) because the 6th Avenue line's tracks are further north than those of the (Q). Obviously, that's minor compared to other stuff. The main purpose of the split (M) / (T) is to give those on Broadway-Brooklyn direct Midtown service at all times and in this case 96th/2nd is likely the best place to terminate on weekends. Given UES riders (as was pointed out by someone else here) would likely want 6th Avenue service at all times, that's why I would so the split during the week with the weekend Broadway-Brooklyn-to-midtown (and UES) line being (T). |
|
|
| (1393892) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Apr 28 19:49:32 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Thu Apr 28 17:50:24 2016. Use the MTA trip finder to go from Grand/Union to 47th/6th. One minute longer via the G and M than via the L and F/M.Now the L is gone. Much longer to take the G south to the M than to take it north to the M. |
|
|
| (1393898) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Apr 28 20:01:37 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Joe V on Thu Apr 28 19:09:16 2016. Not really. It will still be more than the residents had before. |
|
|
| (1393900) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Apr 28 20:21:30 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by randyo on Thu Apr 28 20:01:37 2016. Point is they won't need a Q plus Wally's T. |
|
|
| (1393937) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Fri Apr 29 12:36:54 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Joe V on Thu Apr 28 19:09:16 2016. The SAS will be a grand ridership disappointment with just the Q train.--------- Especially when the dreams and hopes of transit fans both young, old and undeclared are added to the mix. These hopes & dreams were stoked a long time ago with the various plans and stalled projects over the decades. Such that simply the "Q" train does not seem like much. Watch Wallyhorse, ever the optimist, try his best to re-formulate his plans to re-route train traffic to the Second Avenue stub-way. Of course what any of this has a direct bearing on immediately helping the L-train riders of western Brooklyn is an open question. Mike |
|
|
| (1393942) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Fri Apr 29 13:24:57 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by AlM on Thu Apr 28 19:49:32 2016. You are basing those travel times on the published timetable, not how long it takes people to physically move between the (G) platform and the connection. During peak, that could take considerable time. Remember how long it used to take to transfer between the (7) and the QB lines at Roosevelt during peak back in the 70s and 80s? This will be like that, but supersized.MTA needs to promote the el as the preferred alternative, and favor it with the shuttle bus routings. Discourage everyone east of Lorimer from using the (G) unless their destinations are along the Flushing line, or the QB line, or traveling southbound. They need to keep the (M) running to Queens until at least midnight (and later on weekends). At the very least, it must run to Essex 24/7. |
|
|
| (1393943) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Fri Apr 29 13:25:49 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 28 18:48:27 2016. With this (T) nonsense. Enough. |
|
|
| (1393944) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Apr 29 13:36:22 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Fri Apr 29 13:24:57 2016. You are basing those travel times on the published timetable, not how long it takes people to physically move between the (G) platform and the connection.The MTA claims to include walking time. You can't have it both ways. Either lots more people will take the G northbound, in which case yes, walking time between the G and the M at Court Square could increase. Or else they won't in which case walking time won't increase. You can't say that walking time will increase, and therefore people won't use that method. That's akin to Yogi Berra saying that no one goes there any more because it's too crowded. Discourage everyone east of Lorimer from using the (G) unless their destinations are along the Flushing line, or the QB line, or traveling southbound. Discouragement doesn't really work. If G to Court Square is the quickest way to midtown when the L disappears, people will use it up to the point that G cars heading northbound can't fit a single additional passenger. |
|
|
| (1393947) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Fri Apr 29 14:00:21 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 28 19:46:01 2016. Not everyone can have one-seat service, nor can it provided given the reality of the constraints. Period. You are now desperately grasping at straws to justify your plan.The purpose of possible modifications of (M) service is TO SUPPORT DISPLACED (L) RIDERS. Adding a handful of tph ON THE EXISTING QUEENS BLVD ROUTING provides additional capacity WHERE IT IS NEEDED, both along the Bway el, and at Court Square. My additional recommendation of several tph routed to Canarsie will further benefit (L) riders. Getting (L) riders to and from Manhattan as quickly and efficiently as possible is THE NUMBER ONE PRIORITY. The current (M) routing provides access to all of the (L) Manhattan trunk line transfers. It adds further convenience by taking people directly to the CBD, eliminating the need for many people heading to midtown to transfer at all. It also addresses extant need on the Queens Blvd line for additional local service. While likely not a permanent fix, this will at least provide a couple of years' relief. UES riders will in no way be inconvenienced or screwed without your fantasy train. |
|
|
| (1393948) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Fri Apr 29 14:11:31 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 28 18:42:00 2016. No, I don't underestimate it at all. I was up there regularly when I lived in NY. I know full well what the existing trek is like, at all times of day.If SAS had materialized as a full 4-track route, then your fantasy routing would be doable. The plans were for it to feed both the 6th Ave IND and the Bway BMT, as well as the 2nd Av mainline. Had it been built in the 1970s, there probably would be a "via Chrystie" route running there. Today's realities simply make that neither practical nor desirable. You are not going to get your fantasy route. The priority is serving the (L) riders, not your downtrodden, forgotten UES yuppies and coupon-clipping dowagers. |
|
|
| (1393953) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Fri Apr 29 14:34:41 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 28 18:42:00 2016. Seriously,this is rIdiculous.While i appreciate the proposals,i truly doubt the MTA is going to deviate from its present SAS plan. Yes,96th would make a great turn around spot for 6th ave trains short turning...and there no doubt that it will be used as such when needed...but through service would cause conflicts with the Q and F,especially during peak periods.Streamlined services works best. |
|
|
| (1393960) | |
Re: Brooklyn-Manhattan tunnels on (L) train to close in 2019 |
|
|
Posted by jabrams on Fri Apr 29 17:37:30 2016, in response to Re: Brooklyn-Manhattan tunnels on (L) train to close in 2019, posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Apr 25 00:22:57 2016. Bedford Avenue not Bedford Street. |
|
|
| (1393963) | |
Re: Brooklyn-Manhattan tunnels on (L) train to close in 2019 |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 29 18:14:18 2016, in response to Re: Brooklyn-Manhattan tunnels on (L) train to close in 2019, posted by jabrams on Fri Apr 29 17:37:30 2016. Is there a Bedford Street?There's one in the city and a Bedford Place in Brooklyn. |
|
|
| (1393965) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Fri Apr 29 18:31:32 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 23 21:17:47 2016. >>>That is the main reason why I would have the (M) run to 96th/2nd on weekends. Since UES riders would probably demand such a service also run during the week (and they have the political clout to force that), that's why I would do a split of the (M) from Metropolitan Avenue where the (M) runs 19/5 to 71st-Continental and the (T) runs to 96th Street and 2nd Avenue. That also likely reduces as noted before the number of trainsets needed for such a split service. <<<You greatly overestimate how much political clout Yuppies have. They will not be able to force the MTA to do things. They couldn't stop the MTA from putting R62A cars back on the 6 line and send most of its R142A's over to the 7 line. Their counterparts in Park Slope so far haven't been able to get an express service on the F line between Church Ave and Jay St. And so far, only Gale Brewer, the figurehead Manhattan Borough President is calling on the MTA to retain L service on 14th St during the shutdown, even though she has no idea how trains would be able to be inspected or repaired with either no access or extremely restricted access to East New York Yard. They're not going to prevail in getting a 6th Ave service on 2nd Ave either. |
|
|
| (1393977) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Apr 29 20:17:49 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Fri Apr 29 18:31:32 2016. All the clout in the world couldn’t stop the MTA from swapping the R-62As with the R-142s since the NTTs are required for CBTC so the change was an absolute physical necessity. |
|
|
| (1393978) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Fri Apr 29 20:26:41 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by randyo on Fri Apr 29 20:17:49 2016. How come they did not go after the 4's fleet of NTT trains instead of the 6's ? |
|
|
| (1393980) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Fri Apr 29 20:52:19 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Fri Apr 29 18:31:32 2016. Pretty sure Park Slope residents for the most part oppose F express service in that section. To put in an express, without an increase in operating costs, would remove some service from most stations in Park Slope. |
|
|
| (1393985) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Apr 29 22:34:19 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Fri Apr 29 14:00:21 2016. I agree on QB in principle except for one problem:The conga lines that already are in place there. The only way to me you can do that would be to have the (M) and (R) both be extended to 179, something I have endorsed in the past anyway for other reasons. The problem with that is, the current car shortage (even if the (M) gets some trains from the (L) for that time) is one of a few reasons why I would have the split M/T with the (T) to 96th/2nd, the other purpose of it being so there is a terminal on weekends that doesn't screw up the (E) and (F) further than they already are when in particular only the express or local between QP and 71-Continental is in use during CBTC work. Since those on the UES would probably want such service to also operate weekdays, that's why the split. I understand where you're coming from, but that's also why I do things the way I do, to encourage people who change to the (G) at Lorimer to do so in the opposite direction to preferably Fulton Street and a new OOS transfer at the Atlantic Terminal (Atlantic-Barclays, 2/3/4/5/B/D/N/Q/R) or Hoyt for the A/C, especially if going to lower Manhattan in particular. |
|
|
| (1393988) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Fri Apr 29 22:46:28 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by AlM on Fri Apr 29 13:36:22 2016. You misunderstand. I said that when there are substantial crowds, the time to make the transfer will increase. Most people aren't linebackers and can't just plow through densely packed people in their way. Walkways and stairways can only accommodate so many people at a time. Since the (E)(M)(7) are already pretty heavy at that point, and QB is notorious for delays during peak, all bets are off as to what happens then.People are going to do whatever they please. Some absolutely must take the (G) northbound to reach destinations in Queens. However, MTA should make every effort to encourage as many people needing Manhattan during peak as possible to use the less crowded route. Going by the schedule, the time difference is negligible; with the expected surge of riders, the el looks much better. |
|
|
| (1393989) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Apr 29 22:48:28 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Thu Apr 28 17:43:31 2016. To you, it's a fatal flaw:To me, it's something I would be doing anyway, (L) shutdown or not because doing so gives Broadway-Brooklyn riders 24/7 midtown service and those on the UES a 6th Avenue option in addition to the (Q), doubling the service in most off-hours in arguably the most densely populated area in the country (as my Metropolitan-96th Street (T) would be 24/7 and eliminate the (M) shuttles). And unless you've grown up on the UES, you may not realize how many people there work odd hours (LONG before it became the norm for many) and how many people work in the many high-rises that populate the UES, a number that will only grow as new buildings go up. Having twice as many trains serve the SAS in off-hours is another reason I do that. |
|
|
| (1393990) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Apr 29 22:51:26 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Joe V on Thu Apr 28 20:21:30 2016. You forget how densely populated the UES is and how much pressure the (6) in particular has. |
|
|
| (1393992) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Apr 29 22:55:16 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Michael549 on Fri Apr 29 12:36:54 2016. It does more than you realize for reasons I have outlined (CBTC, population density on the UES, etc.) to where I would have that going as soon as the (M) comes back from the work being done on that line, well ahead of the actual (L) shutdown. |
|
|
| (1393993) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Apr 29 22:57:52 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Fri Apr 29 13:24:57 2016. And as I would do it with my split M/T, it would be with the (T) running 24/7 to 96th/2nd and eliminate the late night/weekend (M) shuttles with Broadway-Brooklyn riders getting 24/7 midtown service and UES riders double the service in off-hours. |
|
|
| (1393994) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Fri Apr 29 22:59:15 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Apr 29 22:34:19 2016. No, you don't have to extend both to 179. Send selected or alternating (M) on and fumigate them at Union Tpk or Parsons. Turn them at Parsons, 169, or 179. If need be, send 2 or 3 (F) up the express to reduce potential merge issues. If the conga line reaches 63rd Drive, start sending everything in the queue further up to clear and turn. Yes, it'll cause some delays, but it won't blow up the railroad anything worse than garden variety daily congestion routinely does.Again, stop trying to sell your fantasy. The existing routing can handle an additional handful of tph. In fact, it already did: When the (N) ran to Continental, between it and the (GG), it was probably the same or even an extra tph or 2 turning at Continental. (N) was 15 tph and (GG) was 8 tph. |
|
|
| (1393995) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Apr 29 22:59:32 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Fri Apr 29 22:46:28 2016. Which is why I have an OOS transfer between the Fulton Street (G) station and Atlantic-Barclays on the 2/3/4/5/B/D/N/Q/R to encourage those riders to go there, especially if looking for lower Manhattan. |
|
|
| (1393997) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Apr 29 23:04:01 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Fri Apr 29 14:11:31 2016. The priority IS the (L) riders as you mentioned. That's the main purpose of this.Having the split (M) / (T) with the (T) going to 96th/2nd covers that and also has a full-time terminal that eliminates the (M) shuttles. Knowing how densely populated that part of Manhattan is and how many people actually work on the UES to serve that population is why I think this is warranted regardless of the (L) shutdown or not. |
|
|
| (1393998) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Apr 29 23:08:17 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Edwards! on Fri Apr 29 14:34:41 2016. Actually, it would not be as bad because this would be a 2/1 split between the (Q) and (T) on the SAS during peak hours since even at peak hours the (T) would be a max of 6-7 TPH (as it's actually half of a split (M) with the (M) running 19/5 as it does now). Outside peak hours is when it would be less of a split and where the additional service is actually more important. |
|
|
| (1394000) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Marc A. Rivlin on Sat Apr 30 01:27:41 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by New Flyer #857 on Fri Apr 29 20:52:19 2016. There are probably more Slope F riders boarding at 7th Avenue than 15th Street and 4th Avenue combined. They would love a direct shot to and from Jay Street, one that would avoid Windsor Terrace, Carroll Gardens, and Cobble Hill riders entirely. |
|
|
| (1394001) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Sat Apr 30 01:32:49 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Wed Apr 20 19:31:05 2016. I'll ask again: Can Lorimer be used as a temporary terminal and reverse on the switches at Bedford without having to enter the station itself?If a train must enter, will the work going on there prevent that? Is there any possibility of a switch being added around Lorimer? |
|
|
| (1394002) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Sat Apr 30 01:44:49 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Apr 29 22:59:32 2016. You are completely off the rails.There undoubtedly will be shuttle buses ferrying (L) riders. The routes of those buses should favor depositing people at nearby Broadway stations, not Lorimer-Grand or Court Sq. The big unknown is how much, if any, of the (L) between Canarsie, Bway Jct, Myrtle, or Lorimer, will be in service. Even if the (L) can make it to Lorimer, it won't have anything close to normal service. Manhattan riders should be directed to buses to the el. Only people actually needing the (G) should be making the transfer at Lorimer. In the other scenarios, where the (L) is cut back to Myrtle or Bway Jct, you definitely want to funnel those folks down to the el. And, if only that outermost segment can run, call it <M> and send it to Forest Hills 15-18/7; Bway Jct overnight. |
|
|
| (1394003) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sat Apr 30 01:48:38 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Joe V on Fri Apr 29 20:26:41 2016. West Side local (#1) R62A.East Side local: (#6) R62A. In addition, the 4 needs south terminal destination sign changed. 6 line fleet doesn't. Most Parkchester signed trains lay-up at the end of the day. |
|
|
| (1394004) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Sat Apr 30 01:59:47 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Apr 29 22:48:28 2016. Don't assume I am not familiar with the UES. I had relatives up there. I had friends up there. I dated people up there. I even lived there for a time. I still know people there.A SAS 6th Av route is not going to accomplish anything at this time. It offers no substantial benefit to (L) riders. More service on the (M), possibly including a Canarsie <M> will. The overwhelming majority of folks heading to Wall St or Brooklyn will continue to ride the Lex. The people who would change to the (L) at Union Sq will just stay on a few more stops for the (J). If they want south Brooklyn BMT or IND, the Lex to Union Sq, Bleecker, or Atlantic Av is faster. If they want a 6th Av destination, same platform transfer at Lexington, or walk a block. If they can't handle that, public transit isn't for them. |
|
|
| (1394005) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Sat Apr 30 02:05:02 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Apr 29 23:04:01 2016. No. Putting additional service up SAS gives you a happy ending but doesn't do anything for (L). (M) service must be increased on both the Broadway el and through Court Sq-23rd-Ely. That CANNOT be accomplished if you divert the trains that would provide the 53rd Street service.Operationally, the QB mainline can handle the additional trains in any scenario other than Queens Plaza being inaccesible...in which case it can turn at any 6th Avenue provision, including Queensbridge. There is no reason to send it uptown. None. |
|
|
| (1394008) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 30 03:06:58 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Fri Apr 29 22:59:15 2016. Yes, and that was before fumigation really took effect and other things (as has been noted by others many times). |
|
|
| (1394010) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 30 03:16:50 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Sat Apr 30 01:59:47 2016. Your CarnarsieOne other solution on weekends and holidays during the (L) shutdown might be to do this (when fewer TPH are running overall and can more easily allow this): The (C) re-route noted above (with the (L) cut back as also noted above). The (E) extended to Euclid to replace the (C) on Fulton on weekends. As long as CBTC on QB is not an issue, the split M/T that I would be looking at doing anyway (with the (T) only during overnights). |
|
|
| (1394011) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Apr 30 06:43:53 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Apr 29 22:55:16 2016. We are going to have one under-used service to 96th, called the Q.There is no need for a 2nd service off 6th Avenue. Whining yuppies, not there will be many at all, don't get to determine service levels - loading guide lines do. |
|
|
| (1394012) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Apr 30 06:51:07 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Apr 29 22:51:26 2016. For anyone headed south of 68th on the #4 or 5 or 6 headed to some locale down the east side, or Wall Street area, the SAS is completely useless. |
|
|
| (1394015) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Apr 30 09:46:48 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Joe V on Sat Apr 30 06:51:07 2016. I sometimes need to travel from 80th and 1st to near Union Square. I am greatly looking forward to being able to do that on the Q.Just one data point. |
|
|
| (1394016) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Apr 30 09:51:23 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Sat Apr 30 01:32:49 2016. They'll make it work somehow. Not having L service to Lorimer would just make the whole L shutdown that much worse. Basically you kill the whole L service west of Bway Jct. |
|
|
| (1394017) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Apr 30 09:56:49 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Sat Apr 30 01:44:49 2016. Even if the (L) can make it to Lorimer, it won't have anything close to normal service.Why not a 4-car OPTO train every 5 minutes? That doesn't use that many cars. Manhattan riders should be directed to buses to the el. Only people actually needing the (G) should be making the transfer at Lorimer. Do you not understand how much cheaper it is to move riders by train than by bus? If someone lives near the L between Marcy and Lorimer, you want them to take the L to the G, not fill up expensive shuttle buses. We're talking 160 subway cars worth of passengers in a single hour. If they all took a bus, that's 320 bus loads, which is insane. You want as few as possible of those people to need to take an extra bus. |
|
|
| (1394026) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 30 12:52:37 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by AlM on Sat Apr 30 09:46:48 2016. Right.And although obviously not nearly as many as midtown or even lower Manhattan, the UES thanks the hundreds of high-rises employs many people there as well. That's the other reason I would be doing the (M) split into (M) and (T) once the (M) comes back on line after the repairs. For anyone who works north of 59th who currently has to take the (M) or (L) to the (6) for instance, the (T) to 96th/2nd becomes a very attractive option. Another example, how many who go to Hunter College for instance if they take the (M) first have to switch to the (6) at either Broadway-Lafayette or Lex/53rd? Many of those now would also be able to take the (M) to 63rd/Lex and walk the few blocks instead of having to deal with an overcrowded (6) for most of the ride. |
|
|
|
Page 4 of 7 |
||
