|
|
| Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion (1464991) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 9 of 9 |
||
|
| (1525920) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Oct 5 08:50:32 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Fri Oct 4 22:36:47 2019. And yet you think this same kind of system overseas actually works, lol. |
|
|
| (1525960) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sat Oct 5 17:19:18 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Sat Oct 5 07:48:04 2019. That's why I would place the Z terminal at Broad St.If any issue popped up along the southern division, the east would still have service via Z. Even if that wasn't case, there won't be a need for Z service with the J and W through the tunnel. |
|
|
| (1525989) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Oct 5 19:44:00 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by LuchAAA on Fri Oct 4 18:04:47 2019. You would still need a direct service from the Southern Div to stations along the tunnel and lower Bway route. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1525992) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Oct 5 19:47:57 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Edwards! on Sat Oct 5 17:19:18 2019. I would keep the letter J for regular Jamaica to Broad service and use a different letter like the Z fo the Southern Div service. It’s doubtful that any sort of Nassau St service to the Southern Div any time soon. Over the years, the demographics have changed to the point that it is not really needed since Southern Div passengers can access the financial district on Bway services. |
|
|
| (1526001) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Oct 5 20:08:04 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by randyo on Sat Oct 5 19:44:00 2019. Nassau Street vs. Trinity Place routing serve the same Canal Street complex, and south of ther, I think there are more offices nearer to tha Nassau Stret route. 4 & 5 trains from the Atlantic Avenue complex can get you to the WTC. |
|
|
| (1526004) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Oct 5 20:11:11 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Sat Oct 5 20:08:04 2019. The 2 and 3 can also get you close to the financial district, but why make passengers change at Atlantic/Pacific/Barclay which requires stairways or elevators when the traditional and more popular service is available? |
|
|
| (1526014) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sat Oct 5 22:12:25 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by randyo on Sat Oct 5 19:47:57 2019. Heard different through the grapevine.Somebody up top is listening to those Bay Ridge riders, Plus the situation involving car storage over at ENY,Fresh Pond and Canarsie. Twikes are coming. |
|
|
| (1526015) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sat Oct 5 22:12:25 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by randyo on Sat Oct 5 19:47:57 2019. Heard different through the grapevine.Somebody up top is listening to those Bay Ridge riders, Plus the situation involving car storage over at ENY,Fresh Pond and Canarsie. Twikes are coming. |
|
|
| (1526040) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Sun Oct 6 04:24:54 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Fri Oct 4 17:47:11 2019. They could extend the W to 95th St. rush hours (which would be the same as an R to Astoria) and keep it terminating at Whitehall St. other times, if they need more Bay Ridge locals in the rush. But I thought Bay Ridge doesn't need as much service as Queens Blvd., just as Sea Beach doesn't need as much service as Astoria. |
|
|
| (1526045) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Oct 6 07:48:14 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by randyo on Sat Oct 5 20:11:11 2019. Because I think more people want to head up Nassau Street than Trinity Place. |
|
|
| (1526056) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sun Oct 6 10:16:29 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Sun Oct 6 07:48:14 2019. I don't think ridership figures from when both options were available support your opinion. I believe the R had more traffic than the M from 4th Ave. |
|
|
| (1526076) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Oct 6 13:30:05 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by AlM on Sun Oct 6 10:16:29 2019. R & M had differing origins. The M was also a rush hour service. Those things may have had something to do with it. |
|
|
| (1526078) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sun Oct 6 14:28:17 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Sun Oct 6 13:30:05 2019. None of those stations get much traffic outside of rush hour.If you're on 4th Ave you don't care where your "via tunnel" train originated. |
|
|
| (1526081) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Oct 6 15:01:46 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by AlM on Sun Oct 6 14:28:17 2019. M did not see 4th Avenue south of 36th Street, not a service from 95th Street (which includes Staten Island riders). Bay Pkwy was a convenient turn point, not sent there for any commercial reason. |
|
|
|
Page 9 of 9 |
||
