|
|
| Re: J/Z Skip Stop Re: G southern terminal changed to Church (345497) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 18 of 20 |
||
|
| (348915) | |
Re: J/Z Skip Stop Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Wed Dec 6 11:36:14 2006, in response to Re: J/Z Skip Stop Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by smooth on Wed Dec 6 11:04:38 2006. I've suggested extending the V to Canarsie (via the Williamsburg Bridge) and, during the hours of V operation, turning all L trains at Broadway Junction. As a side benefit, J/Z trains could run express between Broadway Junction and Myrtle, since the V would be on the local track. There might be congestion between Myrtle and Essex, but I think it would be manageable. |
|
|
| (348920) | |
Re: J/Z Skip Stop Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Wed Dec 6 11:42:38 2006, in response to Re: J/Z Skip Stop Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by David of Broadway on Wed Dec 6 11:33:02 2006. "In fact, I can think of nothing that would benefit service on the line more than a 137 reconfiguration."It's not a bad idea. Increasing the #1 capacity would be possible if future demand warranted it. "Too bad we're currently in the process of reducing capacity at the south end! " Reducing it from a theoretical limit of 30 tph, which we've never needed, to 24 trains per hour, which we don't need now but MIGHT need in future, is something only railbuffs like you cry about. Since the Loop is still useable, though, extra trains over and above the 24 tphlimit can still be run if combined with your 137 St idea. South Ferry itself will likely never need 24 tph, but as the new WTC towers open for business, Rector street and a newly built IRT Cortlandt St station might see that kind of demand. Maybe more -who knows? So we'll still be able to pump more trains through there. How are your classes at Kingsborough going? Are you close to giving final exams? Are your students ready? |
|
|
| (348926) | |
Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church) |
|
|
Posted by Rail Blue on Wed Dec 6 11:50:19 2006, in response to Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church), posted by Railman718 on Wed Dec 6 09:55:40 2006. During the Rush Hours 5 trains are Express in the bronx and then thers a thing called the PA system as well its been used for things just like this so i really dont see your point."This is a 5 train making Local Stops in the Bronx to 241 Street Next Stop is East Tremont Ave".. Hows that? It's too much information. The idea that the 5 train goes to somewhere the map says it doesn't will just get people confused. And not everyone can hear the PA - they could be deaf, or the PA simply could be faulty. And if people should rely on the PA, why bother signing the train at all? And if you're going to send trains on routes which do not correspond to the route number, the route number no longer has any relevance to passengers, and should be de-emphasised, with the destination and route displayed on the front of the train instead. Alternatively, the route number shown on the train should be changed to correspond to the actual route it's taking - if it's going to Dyre Avenue, it should be signed as ⑤, something that can be done with ease with R142/R142As. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (348937) | |
Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church) |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:05:14 2006, in response to Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church), posted by R4 Bryn Mawr LCL/R5 Paoli EXP on Wed Dec 6 07:03:51 2006. That only confuses the few who ride these trains. If it was on the map, it'd confuse thousands more. |
|
|
| (348939) | |
Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church) |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:07:48 2006, in response to Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church), posted by italianstallion on Tue Dec 5 22:05:50 2006. All #5's in the AM destined not to be running back to the Bronx CANNOT terminate at Flatbush. There's not a single piece of track to put it on. All trains which enter the Nostrand Ave. line must do a round trip. There used to be a few #2 runs which ran to New Lots. Do they still do that? |
|
|
| (348940) | |
Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church) |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Wed Dec 6 12:08:53 2006, in response to Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church), posted by Rail Blue on Wed Dec 6 11:50:19 2006. Again if the software exists for that train to use if the train is re-routed thats what you use.If its a deuce or a 5 or a 4 then so be it this what we are told to do,take it up with management if its hard to digest. Im being honest not being mean... |
|
|
| (348941) | |
Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church) |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Wed Dec 6 12:10:03 2006, in response to Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church), posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:07:48 2006. Yes they do those are Midnight Jobs on the Deuce. |
|
|
| (348942) | |
Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church) |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:11:29 2006, in response to Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church), posted by Grand Concourse on Tue Dec 5 23:07:18 2006. I'd say send none. Utica should be able to handle all 4 and 5 service, and Nostrand Ave can barely handle 20 TPH. I'd run 18 #2 trains per hour out of Flatbush 30 combined 4/5's from Utica and 12 #3's from New Lots. |
|
|
| (348943) | |
Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church) |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:13:39 2006, in response to Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church), posted by Railman718 on Wed Dec 6 12:10:03 2006. I remember seeing them in the AM rush (reverse peak). Used to get to Atlantic Ave. around 10 AM. |
|
|
| (348944) | |
Re: J/Z Skip Stop Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:17:43 2006, in response to Re: J/Z Skip Stop Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Dec 6 10:55:21 2006. There's no need for a skip-stop on the L. It works on the J because a large percentage of those riders want the final 2 stations, wheras on the L the ridership is concentrated in the middle of the route. It's also a quick ride for most, 42 minutes from Rock Parkway to 8th Ave. |
|
|
| (348945) | |
Re: J/Z Skip Stop Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Dec 6 12:21:02 2006, in response to Re: J/Z Skip Stop Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by RonInBayside on Wed Dec 6 11:17:33 2006. I agree, skip stop would not work well on the L line, and the community was right to object, as many of their stations would see less service. As the other Chris said, it only works well when there is a high percentage of passengers traveling between one end of the line to the other end of the line, like on the J line. With the L line, most of it's load is between Myrtle and Manhattan, just the stations that would be skip stopped. |
|
|
| (348946) | |
Re: J/Z Skip Stop Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:21:05 2006, in response to Re: J/Z Skip Stop Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by smooth on Wed Dec 6 11:04:38 2006. Atlantic |
|
|
| (348948) | |
Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:25:01 2006, in response to Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Dec 6 10:52:54 2006. Oddly enough, the Flushing line didn't get any regularly scheduled express service for the first 20 years it was in operation. |
|
|
| (348949) | |
Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Dec 6 12:25:27 2006, in response to Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church), posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:05:14 2006. I agree, both the 5 extension and the E's to 179th don't belong on the map, it's too confusing. |
|
|
| (348955) | |
Re: J/Z Skip Stop Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Dec 6 12:29:40 2006, in response to Re: J/Z Skip Stop Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by David of Broadway on Wed Dec 6 11:36:14 2006. Well, I might as well copy and paste that post here outlining that idea, I even saved it in a WORD document, from a post I made at SubTalk when you first came up with this great idea. Here's the copy and paste for those that have not seen it, (I didn't re edit it, so it may be geared to the response I was making to the post I was posting to) :I love the idea of the V coming onto the Broadway El. The V terminates anyway only one stop past Broadway-Lafayette, so it's a very simple extention. The problem is though that it's not need past Broadway Junction on the L line. Unfortunately, most of the stations between Broadway Junction and Canarsie are among the lowest used stations in the entire system, Atlantic is the lowest used station in all of Brooklyn!! Two service are definitely not needed there, they really don't even need the full headways of the L there if not for Rockaway Parkway itself! To add insult to injury, the reconstruction of the Atlantic station complex reduced capacity there, and I don't believe they can short turn trains there anymore like they used to. Atlantic would have been ideal to terminate such a service, as it could have just terminated on some of the unused trackage that was there, perhaps the center platform. Anyway, what they could do about this dilema is that they could do some minor changes. Credit for this idea goes to Broadway David though: V: Continental Ave-71 St, Forest Hills to Rockaway Parkway, Canarsie 6th Ave local, Broadway El local. Times: All day weekdays. No service nights and weekends J/Z: Jamaica Center to Broad Street Jamaica-Fulton skip-stop. Full Broadway El express Times: Rush hour skip-stop, Full Broadway El express all day weekdays, No service for Z middays, nights, or weekends. M: Metropolitan Ave to Bay Parkway or Broad St Broadway El local, Nassau local, 4th Ave local, west end local Times: Rush hours only to Bay Parkway. Middays to Broad St (I just can't type Chambers, sorry). Nights and weekends Myrtle shuttle. L: 8th Ave, Manhattan to Broadway Junction, Brooklyn 14th St local Times: Runs all day weekdays in this manner. Weekends and nights when V not running, extended to Rockaway Parkway as it does now. This would solve the "too much Canarsie service problem", allow for full broadway express, give Eastern Division riders midtown access (you may even have a few L passengers reverse commuting to Broadway Junction to be able to get the V for midtown service)! Canarsie line riders would loose direct 14th St service, but would gain direct midtown access. |
|
|
| (348956) | |
Re: J/Z Skip Stop Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Wed Dec 6 12:30:17 2006, in response to Re: J/Z Skip Stop Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by RonInBayside on Wed Dec 6 11:42:38 2006. If you have done the research to indicate that, despite the fact that 1 trains are currently overcrowded (i.e., people have to wait for several trains to pass before they can fit on board) at 20 tph, and despite the continued population growth along the busiest part of the line, no more than 24 tph will ever be necessary to accommodate demand, please post your reasoning now. You've repeated this assertion dozens of times; we're still waiting for the reasoning behind it.If you have done the research to indicate that 2½-minute headways are sufficient to recover from service disruptions, please post your reasoning now. Bear in mind that one of the goals of the new terminal is to ease recovery from service disruptions; please explain how the new terminal accomplishes this feat despite a 20% reduction in capacity. If you have done the research to indicate that the new terminal, with a layout similar to that at Jamaica Center, will be able to turn 24 tph, even though Jamaica Center itself can only turn 12 tph, please post your reasoning now. You've repeated this assertion dozens of times; we're still waiting for the reasoning behind it. The tracks leading to the two South Ferries will cross at grade. In other words, northbound trains out of the new terminal will conflict with southbound trains into the old loop. Using both branches is hardly a recipe to increase capacity. The busiest part of the line is north of Times Square. The part of the line south of Chambers Street carries less traffic, carried less traffic in 2000, and will carry less traffic even after the WTC is fully reopened. Transportation planners plan for the future. Transportation planners estimate the projected growth over a long time period and plan for that growth plus a margin of error. Transportation planners don't call for a reduction in capacity to below the level of projected growth. Transportation planners don't rank aesthetic desires ahead of basic transportation needs when the two come into conflict -- rather, they find a way to accommodate aesthetic desires within the basic needs of the transportation system. You asked about my students? I train my students to answer the questions at hand rather than to dodge them. Let's see if you're up to their standards. |
|
|
| (348958) | |
Re: J/Z Skip Stop Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Dec 6 12:31:31 2006, in response to Re: J/Z Skip Stop Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:21:05 2006. I don't understand why they didn't keep the old center platform up at Atlantic for just that reason, structurally, that part of the el had to remain anyway, so why not keep it usable? |
|
|
| (348961) | |
Re: SAS Nassau option Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:34:08 2006, in response to SAS Nassau option Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Dec 6 10:04:29 2006. I prefer my plan, which allows trains from 2nd Ave to access Nassau St, but allows trains from the Willy B to access 2nd Ave. Here's what I'd do: J/Z: Jamaica Center to 125th St/2nd. M: Metropolitan Ave to Chambers St (weekdays) T: 125th to Broad St (Bay Parkway rush hours) Turn the Q at 72nd/2nd, as the combined T and J/Z would be enough service for the whole line. The V could then be routed to Church and express service instituted south of Jay St. J/Z riders get their one seat ride to midtown. (since the SAS and Nassau St. lines would be merged so thoroughly, I'd make the whole thing brown, not sky blue, including the T) |
|
|
| (348968) | |
Re: SAS Nassau option Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Dec 6 12:37:54 2006, in response to Re: SAS Nassau option Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:34:08 2006. Interesting. Okay, I'll buy that. There would be no more "Nassau Line", as the Nassau Line would be completely absorbed into the new Second Ave subway. Truth be told, I think that would be necessary had the Second Ave subway taken over the Nassau line anyway, either the brown would have had to have been dropped, or the blue never brought up, as the new line would have been one line with an offshoot to the Broadway El. Think of it like how the 8th Ave line is completely blue, with an offshoot onto 53rd St, that's what the Essex leg would look like.I like it! |
|
|
| (348969) | |
Re: J/Z Skip Stop Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:38:21 2006, in response to Re: J/Z Skip Stop Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Dec 6 12:31:31 2006. Me neither. Demolishing Sneideker Ave. made sense, that structure had been unecessary since 1956. Keeping all 4 tracks and both platforms at Atlantic would have been relatively simple, even with CBTC considerations. |
|
|
| (348982) | |
Re: Combine the M-V part ix |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:45:17 2006, in response to Re: Combine the M-V part ix, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Dec 5 21:55:38 2006. True. I was just noting that a larger percentage of M riders wanting the financial district probably reside along the Queens portion of the line's outer end. |
|
|
| (348983) | |
Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church) |
|
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Wed Dec 6 12:45:22 2006, in response to Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church), posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:07:48 2006. There are four in the AM rush. One returns to the Bronx (Nereid); the others are layups. I often see the 7:45 WP, signed for New Lots.The three AM layups become PM putins. I'm not aware of any scheduled late night or weekend 2 trips to or from New Lots (or Utica). In the AM rush, the 5 has 12 trips to Utica, 3 trips out of Utica, and 2 trips out of New Lots (including the first Brooklyn 5 of the day). In the PM rush, the 5 has 9 trips out of Utica, and then in the early evening another 5 trips to Utica, 1 trip to New Lots, and 2 trips out of Utica. |
|
|
| (348984) | |
Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:47:15 2006, in response to Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by David of Broadway on Tue Dec 5 22:33:20 2006. That's not the same as the 2 I described. For one, the N is an express which continues north. In the 1980's, it did the same, even skipping 49th St. |
|
|
| (348991) | |
Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:49:44 2006, in response to Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by Rail Blue on Tue Dec 5 22:54:33 2006. It is not an express stop. Q's still skip it. The only reason the N switches over to the local track at 34th is because Q's terminating block the express tracks at 57th. It'll be interesting to see what happens to the N after the Q is extended up the SAS. N's could probably run thru 57th on the express track. |
|
|
| (348992) | |
Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Wed Dec 6 12:50:36 2006, in response to Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:47:15 2006. But of the four routes that serve 57/7, the one that terminates there is an express. |
|
|
| (348998) | |
Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Wed Dec 6 12:52:49 2006, in response to Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:49:44 2006. No, the N could still cross to the local just south of 57.The reason the N stops at 49 is that it's a high-usage stop, particularly among Astoria residents. |
|
|
| (349002) | |
Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:55:15 2006, in response to Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Dec 5 21:33:05 2006. Three were removed. Two of the three were part time booths (102nd St, Elderts Lane), the other was an exit/iron-maiden only. Even before the introduction of the Metrocard, I could easily justify keeping 2 of them as exits only, like at Autumn Ave or 123rd St. To be fair, the Forest Parkway end of the station was in atrocious condition, stank of urine, had iron maidens no one ever used and was probably dangerous at night. I remember |
|
|
| (349003) | |
Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:57:29 2006, in response to Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Dec 5 21:47:32 2006. True, and the location of the cemetary west of the station always dictated that the 75th St. exit would get used considerably more than the old Elderts Lane one. |
|
|
| (349006) | |
Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church) |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Wed Dec 6 12:59:35 2006, in response to Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church), posted by David of Broadway on Wed Dec 6 12:45:22 2006. No there are no late night or weekend Deuces that Go out to ZooLots or Utica.On Saturday there is a Flatbush Put-in from Livonia Yard though. There are 7 Trains that leave ZooLots(one of them a put-in, all the rest in service) on the PM's only three of em come back, the 1709 comes back to ZooLots and is a lay-up. The 1355 Put-in to Utica along with the 1603 Zoolots come back to Flatbush. Of coruse those are offset with the 5 trains that go out to Utica on the PM's and are laid up at Livoina Yard. |
|
|
| (349008) | |
Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church) |
|
|
Posted by Rail Blue on Wed Dec 6 12:59:43 2006, in response to Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church), posted by Railman718 on Wed Dec 6 12:08:53 2006. Im being honest not being mean...Oh, I appreciate it. It's just one of those typical policies invented by someone who doesn't live in the real world. |
|
|
| (349014) | |
Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church) |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Wed Dec 6 13:02:34 2006, in response to Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church), posted by Rail Blue on Wed Dec 6 12:59:43 2006. Exactly...We as sure as heck see eye to eye on this... |
|
|
| (349019) | |
Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 13:04:41 2006, in response to Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Dec 5 22:06:49 2006. I'm hesitant to take away even more flexibility from this line (which has already been whittled down considerably). I also want to see Chambers St. completely restored, with all 4 tracks (the side platform could be walled off). |
|
|
| (349023) | |
Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 13:05:51 2006, in response to Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by Grand Concourse on Tue Dec 5 23:28:58 2006. The capacity and trackage already exist here. No need to remove it, even if other lines don't have it at all. |
|
|
| (349025) | |
Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church) |
|
|
Posted by Rail Blue on Wed Dec 6 13:09:39 2006, in response to Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church), posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:11:29 2006. Utica should be able to handle all 4 and 5 service, and Nostrand Ave can barely handle 20 TPH.What makes you think Utica's such a great terminal layout? |
|
|
| (349026) | |
Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Wed Dec 6 13:09:56 2006, in response to Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 13:05:51 2006. Trackage requires maintenance. TA crews are required to inspect it, test geometry periodically, etc. etc. If there is some use for it the TA spends resources maintaining it. If there's none, they want to take it out. |
|
|
| (349028) | |
Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 13:11:46 2006, in response to Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by David of Broadway on Wed Dec 6 12:52:49 2006. The W stops there when the N doesn't. Moving the N merger with the R/W to 59th St. delays fewer people. It sucks to have to get to Times Sq. and one train has to sit at 34th and wait for the other to clear. |
|
|
| (349030) | |
Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Dec 6 13:12:39 2006, in response to Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:55:15 2006. From what I remember, 104 had the 102 mezzaine removed (ironic, as that was the original station name), Forest Parkway-85th had the Forest Parkway mezzanine removed (again, the original name), and 121st St's 123rd St mezzanine is gone too I believe. That means 111th and Woodhaven still have their abandoned sides (I don't remember off hand). I know I remember Cypress Hills' and Elderts still being there, why Cypress Hills, I haven't a clue, and I think it's even stilll open sometimes! I wonder why they left 111th's there. |
|
|
| (349034) | |
Re: SAS Nassau option Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 13:19:01 2006, in response to Re: SAS Nassau option Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Dec 6 12:37:54 2006. It's amazing that I originally came up with this idea 15 years ago, with absolutley no knowledge of the 1949 plan! That idea had a 4 track line, with the J/M/Z operating express and another train (I gave it the letter K) running local and via Nassau St. |
|
|
| (349036) | |
Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by jrr4 on Wed Dec 6 13:22:55 2006, in response to Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 13:11:46 2006. This topic has to hold the record for the most discussion. |
|
|
| (349044) | |
Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Dec 6 13:27:49 2006, in response to Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by jrr4 on Wed Dec 6 13:22:55 2006. Yes, a very productive, informative thread for discussion, with no crap. The Bushwick last wee about the mystery el photo at Eastern parkway was another great long, no nonsense thread, but not quite as long.I had to go to reading this thread in the "view flat" format, as it's almost impossible in the normal threaded format. |
|
|
| (349049) | |
Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Wed Dec 6 13:33:29 2006, in response to Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 13:11:46 2006. Having the N bypass 49 would unnecessarily overload the W.Moving the merge point would simply move the delays. Instead of northbound passengers into Times Square being delayed, southbound passengers into Times Square will be delayed. If you don't want to be delayed, read the holding lights and transfer as appropriate. (That's easier to do at 34 than at 57, since Q trains leave from both platforms.) |
|
|
| (349055) | |
Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church) |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 13:38:19 2006, in response to Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church), posted by Rail Blue on Wed Dec 6 13:09:39 2006. It's turnaround abilities, compared to Flatbush Ave, are superior. Utica should be able to handle all the East Side service which runs to Brooklyn. |
|
|
| (349058) | |
Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 13:39:34 2006, in response to Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by jrr4 on Wed Dec 6 13:22:55 2006. It's second to "when will the R44's be scrapped?" |
|
|
| (349063) | |
Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 13:43:58 2006, in response to Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Dec 6 13:12:39 2006. 121st St. still has it's "other" mezzanine, though it's an exit only. You never enter the mezzanine, you go through an exit gate and directly down the stairs. Same thing at Cypress Hills. 111th St has had it's "other" mezzanine taken over as a crew room or storage facility. Access to it is blocked by a locked door. I think (but do not know) that the little room which controlled the switches here had it's equipment moved into the unused mezzanine below. |
|
|
| (349069) | |
Re: SAS Nassau option Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by Rail Blue on Wed Dec 6 13:48:23 2006, in response to Re: SAS Nassau option Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 13:19:01 2006. It's amazing that I originally came up with this idea 15 years ago, with absolutley no knowledge of the 1949 plan! That idea had a 4 track line, with the J/M/Z operating express and another train (I gave it the letter K) running local and via Nassau St.:-) So where did they go at the northern end? |
|
|
| (349071) | |
Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Dec 6 13:49:12 2006, in response to Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 13:43:58 2006. Hmmm, I could have sworn 121st's was gone.... So Woodhaven is the other station where it's gone? Forest Parkway, 104 and Woodhaven? |
|
|
| (349078) | |
Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 13:53:31 2006, in response to Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Dec 6 13:49:12 2006. Forest Pkway, 104th St and Elderts Lane. 121st and Cypress still have the other mezzanines open as part time exits. 111th's is there but no longer accesable, serving another function. Only Woodhaven retains 2 mezzanines that have booths. |
|
|
| (349082) | |
Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church) |
|
|
Posted by mtk52983 on Wed Dec 6 13:54:33 2006, in response to Re: 5 to Utica vs Flatbush (was G Southern Terminal Changed to Church), posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 12:07:48 2006. Over the summer I would usually catch a 2 signed up for Zoo Lots as the train I took to Penn Station arrived just after 8 AM |
|
|
| (349086) | |
Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Dec 6 13:55:43 2006, in response to Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 13:53:31 2006. Wow, that shows you how much I payed attention, I thought Eldert still had it's mezzanine. |
|
|
| (349087) | |
Re: SAS Nassau option Re: G southern terminal changed to Church |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 6 13:56:22 2006, in response to Re: SAS Nassau option Re: G southern terminal changed to Church, posted by Rail Blue on Wed Dec 6 13:48:23 2006. The locals turned at 125th St, the expresses ran to Fordham Road via 3rd Ave (including a massive MTA/MNRR transfer point). |
|
|
|
Page 18 of 20 |
||
