|
|
| Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle (428152) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 4 of 16 |
||
|
| (428657) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat May 12 15:32:54 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by R30A on Sat May 12 15:27:36 2007. Just average? But were they higher than the current ridership on the J/Z at Sutphin and Jamacia center |
|
|
| (428658) | |
M Train in Brooklyn (Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by Bzuck on Sat May 12 15:34:10 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri May 11 13:54:33 2007. How much ridership does the M train get between Bay Parkway and 9th Avenue?Would it make sense to end the run at 9th Avenue and use the extra train sets to increase L service. Maybe than there will be enough 4 car R160 sets available to service the entire eastern division along with the R143's. |
|
|
| (428659) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat May 12 15:35:06 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Grand concourse on Sat May 12 15:26:18 2007. 168th was probably the heaviest. Within 3 blocks you had some major stores (Mays, Macy's, Gertz, the original Wiz, Young World, 2 movie theatres). 160th was not used much, except those headed to the Board of Health offices on Parsons Blvd (where my brother and I got our booster shots). That would have changed had the el survived long enough to see the completion of the court building and the expansion of York college in the 1980's. Sutphin was a major train/bus/LIRR x-fer point. It was an A/B stop during the old skip-stop express service. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (428660) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Sat May 12 15:36:29 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by RonInBayside on Fri May 11 16:39:26 2007. The crossover is about 200 feet BEYOND Sutphin/Archer, and trains have to travel well over 1000 feet beyond that to Jamaica Center. That is what limits the line to 12 tph.However, more service could be added by running some trains to 111 Street or Crescent Street ONLY. |
|
|
| (428661) | |
Re: M Train in Brooklyn (Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat May 12 15:37:59 2007, in response to M Train in Brooklyn (Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Bzuck on Sat May 12 15:34:10 2007. Few use it north of 36th St. It's basically a shuttle for express service here. The M's biggest advantage is how it augments R service between Court St. and 36th. It'd probably do better augmenting it all the way to Bay Ridge, but the infrastructure prevents this. |
|
|
| (428662) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Sat May 12 15:39:04 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by RonInBayside on Fri May 11 17:01:20 2007. Trains during the rush hour stack up (I use this station every day). It is only slightly better on the E level. |
|
|
| (428663) | |
Re: M Train in Brooklyn (Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by Bzuck on Sat May 12 15:39:17 2007, in response to Re: M Train in Brooklyn (Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat May 12 15:37:59 2007. So it soulds like they may as well turn it at 9th Avenue. |
|
|
| (428666) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat May 12 15:40:10 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Grand concourse on Sat May 12 15:32:54 2007. Probably not, since Archer Ave sees thousands of riders who x-fer from bus routes. Back in the 70's, these people would have x-ferred to the E and F at 169th/Hillside. |
|
|
| (428671) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat May 12 15:43:46 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by AMoreira81 on Sat May 12 15:36:29 2007. That really can't be done much anymore. These two spots are now isolated, controlled from the ENY master tower. Besides, J ridership is heavy to/from Archer Ave. Short-turning trains short of this section makes no sense. The 12 TPH capacity limit does not really affect J ridership. That's enough for this part of the line. |
|
|
| (428673) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Sat May 12 15:47:26 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat May 12 15:43:46 2007. It would allow for skip-stop to be permanently eliminated, however...which is a waste. |
|
|
| (428674) | |
Re: M Train in Brooklyn (Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat May 12 15:47:35 2007, in response to Re: M Train in Brooklyn (Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Bzuck on Sat May 12 15:39:17 2007. They spent millions rebuilding the tower and crew quarters at Bay Parkway. Nothing really exists at 9th, except for that lonely box at the western edge of the Manhattan-bound platform. If the MTA wanted to cut rush hour service on the M line back to 9th Ave, few would complain. Only those headed from Downtown Brooklyn and/or Nassau St. would suffer. |
|
|
| (428675) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat May 12 15:50:58 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by AMoreira81 on Sat May 12 15:47:26 2007. Skip-stop service is certainly not a waste. Any time savings for J riders is welcomed. Those headed for Jamaica Center from Manhattan can save more than 5 minutes going skip-stop. It made no sense on the 1/9 line, but it does on this one. Besides, it's been reduced to about one hour each way now. |
|
|
| (428684) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat May 12 15:55:26 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat May 12 15:35:06 2007. Thanks. |
|
|
| (428689) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat May 12 15:58:12 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat May 12 15:11:00 2007. And most of the posts were pretty interesting too especially the insights about the former jamacia el to 168th/M to Ditmars. :( |
|
|
| (428691) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat May 12 16:04:52 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Grand concourse on Sat May 12 15:55:26 2007. I wonder if there's ANY source on the 'net to see just how much ridership these stations got, especially during the last full year of service (1976). Queens Blvd's ridership must've been paltry. There's really nothing there, even then. |
|
|
| (428693) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 16:08:28 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Grand concourse on Sat May 12 14:21:03 2007. Wrong question.What is YOUR source to back up the claim? You want to blame Macy's. Fine. Prove it. A single MTA chair who used to work for them is not proof. |
|
|
| (428695) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat May 12 16:09:51 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 16:08:28 2007. No, I just want to know what claim you have by pointing out a claim made by another person. I have no claim in this - I am just the middle man. |
|
|
| (428696) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 16:11:43 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat May 12 15:13:11 2007. That's very true, and it was unfortunate that this did not happen.Extending the current line to Ma new stop at Merrick Blvd. would restore the equivalent of the original service (plus you get to transfer to the E after one stop). Extending both the E and J to Merrick/Archer would be very good indeed, though more expensive! |
|
|
| (428698) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat May 12 16:14:13 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 16:08:28 2007. Yes, it is. It's plenty of proof. When the man who wanted to demolish the el becomes MTA chairman and oversees said demolition, it's usually enough for anyone with average intelligence to conclude that it was the major factor. |
|
|
| (428700) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 16:15:18 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat May 12 15:17:25 2007. "Yes, it can when those officials owe allegience to a special interest group, notably Macy"They owed no such allegiance. Not even close. They considered Macy's a good anchor on the street. That's it. You could convince me that Macy's duped a group of the other merchants to go along with Macy's (support Macy's) on this and then stabbed them in the back. That's plausible. |
|
|
| (428703) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 16:17:00 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat May 12 15:50:58 2007. Agreed. Skip stop actually serves the J nicely. |
|
|
| (428704) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 16:18:00 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat May 12 15:35:06 2007. Merrick/Archer should be only a block or so away. Too bad we couldn't extend the line there. |
|
|
| (428707) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 16:18:41 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat May 12 16:14:13 2007. No, all it does is demonstrate your lack of understanding of NYC politics. |
|
|
| (428708) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat May 12 16:19:48 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 16:15:18 2007. Proof of: "They considered Macy's a good anchor on the street. That's it." |
|
|
| (428710) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 16:20:12 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat May 12 15:11:00 2007. We could put on a ChrisIsAKnucklehead moment, but most networks consider sex with an inanimate object to be a violation of broadcast standards. |
|
|
| (428711) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Sat May 12 16:21:44 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 15:09:43 2007. It was already stated that Mr. Yunich was chair at the time. Yunich had worked for Macy's. That's true.Holy Haliburton! Could you be a more specific about his position with Macy's? What was his title, when he became MTA chairman? What was his title immediately before that? |
|
|
| (428712) | |
Re: Increasing QB capacity |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat May 12 16:22:36 2007, in response to Re: Increasing QB capacity, posted by RonInBayside on Fri May 11 22:51:54 2007. Aren't you supposedly on top of all this? |
|
|
| (428713) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 16:23:36 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Grand concourse on Sat May 12 16:19:48 2007. You need to cite real evidence that Macy's dictated TA policy all by itself.As to the anchor comment, visit any mall or major shopping street and look at the anchor tenant. There is always a big store that is the main tenant, which draws the customers into the mall or to the street. The other litle stores feed off of that customer traffic. That's why Macy's was important to Jamaica Av. You need to do something besides railfan. That's how you get to learn things besides what kind of subway car runs on which line. :0) |
|
|
| (428714) | |
Re: Increasing QB capacity |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat May 12 16:23:50 2007, in response to Re: Increasing QB capacity, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat May 12 12:06:46 2007. in some ways that makes sense to deter everyone from just getting on the express and hope they would choose the J/Z as well. |
|
|
| (428716) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 16:26:58 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Stephen Bauman on Sat May 12 16:21:44 2007. David Yunich was President of Bamberger's, a chain of stores that merged with Mascy's (or Macy's bought them, I don't recall). |
|
|
| (428717) | |
Re: Increasing QB capacity |
|
|
Posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Sat May 12 16:28:22 2007, in response to Re: Increasing QB capacity, posted by RonInBayside on Fri May 11 17:00:36 2007. The problem is, is that they always lay-up trains on the express tracks North of Union Turnpike. |
|
|
| (428718) | |
Re: Increasing QB capacity |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 16:28:56 2007, in response to Re: Increasing QB capacity, posted by Grand concourse on Sat May 12 16:22:36 2007. No, but if you want to know what the average "fumigation" time is, you should be.My main point is that a lot of "facts" bandied about here are just railbuff bullshit. |
|
|
| (428719) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat May 12 16:29:14 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Stephen Bauman on Sat May 12 16:21:44 2007. Wasn't Yunich in charge of the trains for their Christmas displays? How much harder could it have been to run some real trains? |
|
|
| (428720) | |
Re: Increasing QB capacity |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 16:30:18 2007, in response to Re: Increasing QB capacity, posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Sat May 12 16:28:22 2007. The other problem is that the TA would not want to implement what I just described (and I agree it's not a great idea). |
|
|
| (428721) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 16:31:26 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat May 12 16:29:14 2007. Some people who post here think it's a breeze. They want to be appointed MTA chair. :0) |
|
|
| (428723) | |
Re: Increasing QB capacity |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat May 12 16:33:08 2007, in response to Re: Increasing QB capacity, posted by Grand concourse on Sat May 12 16:23:50 2007. I'm betting the politicians in southeastern Queens balked at approving all those bus reroutes to Jamaica Center without one of the Queens expresses feeding the station. |
|
|
| (428724) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat May 12 16:34:47 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 16:31:26 2007. No, only perhaps you. I'm sure they at the MTA would love you. |
|
|
| (428727) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 16:39:27 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Grand concourse on Sat May 12 16:34:47 2007. Unlike stephen and perhaps you, I do not aspire to that.On the other hand, MTA has implemented three ideas that I developed, with some help by on subtalk from other posters who helped me refine them. A lawyer who used to post here and lives in LA submitted an idea which I refined and submitted to MTA when MTA was trying to decide what to do about a refundable MetroCard. Our idea was for an Insured MetroCard (which would cost an extra buck). Ultimately MTA went with a different scheme but still accomplished something riders wanted. |
|
|
| (428728) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by BIE on Sat May 12 16:41:38 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 16:39:27 2007. "A lawyer who used to post here"Was his initials JB ? "Esq"? |
|
|
| (428729) | |
Re: Increasing QB capacity |
|
|
Posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Sat May 12 16:41:59 2007, in response to Re: Increasing QB capacity, posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 16:30:18 2007. So then some one should step up and talk to the big shots. |
|
|
| (428730) | |
Re: Increasing QB capacity |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 16:46:29 2007, in response to Re: Increasing QB capacity, posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Sat May 12 16:41:59 2007. OK |
|
|
| (428731) | |
Re: Increasing QB capacity |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat May 12 16:50:32 2007, in response to Re: Increasing QB capacity, posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 16:28:56 2007. "railbuff bullshit"That's adding fuel to the fire there. |
|
|
| (428732) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat May 12 16:51:41 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by BIE on Sat May 12 16:41:38 2007. Was his middle name "King"? |
|
|
| (428733) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Sat May 12 16:58:25 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by Grand concourse on Sat May 12 16:51:41 2007. Not if it is who I think it is. |
|
|
| (428734) | |
Re: Increasing QB capacity |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 17:02:49 2007, in response to Re: Increasing QB capacity, posted by Grand concourse on Sat May 12 16:50:32 2007. Good. Bring the marshmallows. |
|
|
| (428735) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 17:04:39 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by R30A on Sat May 12 16:58:25 2007. Hint: He's a very bright and portly gentleman who favored Junior's for lunch.By Subtalk I meant the old Subtalk run by Dave Pirmann. |
|
|
| (428737) | |
Re: Increasing QB capacity |
|
|
Posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Sat May 12 17:10:16 2007, in response to Re: Increasing QB capacity, posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 17:02:49 2007. And popcorn. |
|
|
| (428744) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Sat May 12 17:16:54 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by RonInBayside on Sat May 12 16:26:58 2007. You can do better than that. Just google him. |
|
|
| (428745) | |
Re: Increasing QB capacity |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sat May 12 17:17:04 2007, in response to Re: Increasing QB capacity, posted by Railman718 on Sat May 12 07:59:04 2007. One cannot put a time limit on how long it takes to fumigate a train. Sometimes you have a sound sleeping or a beligerant/drunk "customer" who decides to argue with transit personel about getting off. You could have this condition multiple times on the same train. Sometimes they have bags upon bags of personal belongings they have to lug off. And then you have the crew office who refuses to cover the platform jobs. But what do I know, I only work at a terminal and a few know it all's here think I'm exaggerating. |
|
|
| (428755) | |
Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sat May 12 17:39:51 2007, in response to Re: May 11, 1975. . .End of the Culver shuttle, posted by RonInBayside on Fri May 11 21:14:40 2007. Has a lot to do with them NOT making modifications to the "original plans" after it was decided that the line would go no further.I believe there was still hopes,even after it was quite clear that this would not happen due to lack of funding,that the line could "potentially" travel east of Jamaica one day. Since Parsons was intended to be the "interm" terminal..for a "few years"..it really didn't matter where the switch was placed..since the REAL TERMINAL would have decent turn around matching 168th and better. |
|
|
|
Page 4 of 16 |
||
