|
|
| Culver Express Service (454942) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
| (454942) | |
Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by Robert From Queens on Mon Jul 2 18:15:48 2007 When in the 80's was Culver express service stopped?What was the reason for stopping the service - budgetary or repair related? |
|
|
| (454962) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by David on Mon Jul 2 19:27:34 2007, in response to Culver Express Service, posted by Robert From Queens on Mon Jul 2 18:15:48 2007. 1975 - fiscal crisis.David |
|
|
| (455056) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by Robert From Queens on Mon Jul 2 22:06:28 2007, in response to Culver Express Service, posted by Robert From Queens on Mon Jul 2 18:15:48 2007. Thanks - amazing how the MTA has avoided restoring service all these years. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (455068) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Mon Jul 2 22:19:36 2007, in response to Re: Culver Express Service, posted by Robert From Queens on Mon Jul 2 22:06:28 2007. You mean the express between 18th Avenue and KH? That's on a map I have from 1985. Or were you referring to the Bergen to Church express? (Technically not the Culver line.) |
|
|
| (455118) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 3 00:50:09 2007, in response to Re: Culver Express Service, posted by David on Mon Jul 2 19:27:34 2007. But it ran in the 80's. |
|
|
| (455119) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 3 00:51:24 2007, in response to Re: Culver Express Service, posted by Nilet on Mon Jul 2 22:19:36 2007. Or were you referring to the Bergen to Church express?Do they call the South Brooklyn line Culver too? I always thought only the el was called "Culver". |
|
|
| (455156) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Tue Jul 3 03:47:22 2007, in response to Re: Culver Express Service, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 3 00:51:24 2007. Or were you referring to the Bergen to Church express? (Technically not the Culver line.) |
|
|
| (455162) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Tue Jul 3 04:34:02 2007, in response to Culver Express Service, posted by Robert From Queens on Mon Jul 2 18:15:48 2007. I thought it was the Park slope residents outraged about not having a one-seat local service to Manhattan having to take the G to transfer to the F? Plus the G having worse headways than the F. |
|
|
| (455176) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by David on Tue Jul 3 05:41:10 2007, in response to Re: Culver Express Service, posted by Nilet on Mon Jul 2 22:19:36 2007. The article about the drive to restore F express service said there hadn't been any since the 1980s. However, on the part of the line where the people want express service (Church-Jay), there hasn't been any (outside of service diversions) since 1975.David |
|
|
| (455177) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by David on Tue Jul 3 05:44:19 2007, in response to Re: Culver Express Service, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 3 00:50:09 2007. Not on the part of the F where the people are asking for express service. That started in 1968 and ended in 1975.David |
|
|
| (455181) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Jul 3 05:59:40 2007, in response to Re: Culver Express Service, posted by Grand concourse on Tue Jul 3 04:34:02 2007. That's true, however:As noted in other threads, if you extended BOTH the G and V to Church Avenue (or have the C/V switch at West 4th with the C and G going to Church Avenue and the V going to Euclid), that would allow the F to go express to Church Avenue, especially if you restored the lower level of Bergen Street to where it could be an express stop. |
|
|
| (455258) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 3 10:11:57 2007, in response to Re: Culver Express Service, posted by David on Tue Jul 3 05:44:19 2007. I thought when he mentioned Culver he was talking about the el, not the South Brooklyn IND subway. Sorry, I misunderstood. |
|
|
| (455270) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by frilter199 on Tue Jul 3 10:39:44 2007, in response to Culver Express Service, posted by Robert From Queens on Mon Jul 2 18:15:48 2007. How much time would the F express save? 2-3 minutes? With timers and waiting for connections probably nothing at all. |
|
|
| (455272) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Jul 3 10:42:41 2007, in response to Culver Express Service, posted by Robert From Queens on Mon Jul 2 18:15:48 2007. If you're referring to the express service between 18th Ave and Kings Highway, it ended in 1987, and it was definatley repair related. During the summer that year temporary platforms were put in so that both local tracks could be replaced while service still ran. When the project was done, express service was gone. A major switch south of Kings Highway needed to run this service in the AM was removed shortly after. |
|
|
| (455273) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Jul 3 10:44:03 2007, in response to Re: Culver Express Service, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 3 00:51:24 2007. The term "Culver" has come to mean the entire F line south of Jay St. |
|
|
| (455276) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Jul 3 10:46:30 2007, in response to Re: Culver Express Service, posted by frilter199 on Tue Jul 3 10:39:44 2007. Skipping Fort Hamilton, 15th St, 4th Ave, Smith/9th, Carrol & Bergen would probably save 5 minutes. That's about the savings I've noticed on the few runs I've ridden. Time savings isn't the major selling point of restored express service here. Splitting up the crowds is. |
|
|
| (455277) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jul 3 10:46:40 2007, in response to Re: Culver Express Service, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Jul 3 10:44:03 2007. Nope. The "Culver" is the elevated, diverting toward 9th Avenue on the now gone "shuttle".South Brooklyn Subway is a good moniker, I call it the "Smith Street Subway" to identify the place when I speak of it. ROAR |
|
|
| (455278) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Jul 3 10:48:14 2007, in response to Re: Culver Express Service, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jul 3 10:46:40 2007. Not anymore. Technically you are correct, but common usage of the term now means the entire F line south of Jay St. Only railfans and employees even know of a distinction between the IND and former BMT sections. |
|
|
| (455302) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Tue Jul 3 11:20:50 2007, in response to Re: Culver Express Service, posted by David on Tue Jul 3 05:41:10 2007. My memory tells me that express service between Jay St and Chruch Avenue ended in 1976, not '75, as part of the same set of service cuts that saw the end of the EE and the K (Chrystie St service) trains.Express service on the Culver el continued well into the 1980s. In fact, I actually have a 1987 map indicating that while the N/R terminal switch was permanent, the suspension of express service on the 7 and F (Culver) was temporary due to construction work. We never got the Culver express back. Additionally, if memory serves me correct, we almost didn't get express service back on the 7- the MTA board resolution to restore it passed by one vote in 1989. At the same meeting, the board approved the 1/9 skip-stop unanimously. I also didn't, and still don't understand why MTA Board action was necessary to resotre a service that was only suspended "temporarily" for construction. |
|
|
| (455311) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jul 3 11:54:04 2007, in response to Re: Culver Express Service, posted by frilter199 on Tue Jul 3 10:39:44 2007. It is not about saving time. It never was. The people who are proposing this will not be the ones riding on these express trains. The express trains will sail right by their stops, because the are the ones living at the local stops.What they *will* get is an empty train with plenty of seats. Can you say (V) train? ROAR |
|
|
| (455314) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jul 3 11:55:55 2007, in response to Re: Culver Express Service, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Jul 3 10:48:14 2007. But they are also the only ones who would even know the word "Culver"ROAR |
|
|
| (455320) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Jul 3 12:04:16 2007, in response to Re: Culver Express Service, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jul 3 11:55:55 2007. They see it every day because both R46 and R32 signage displays that name. Few of these people know that the "Culver" part refers only to the elevated line below Church and that that line used to be a seperate entity. |
|
|
| (455324) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Jul 3 12:07:32 2007, in response to Re: Culver Express Service, posted by MainR3664 on Tue Jul 3 11:20:50 2007. You hafta understand one simple thing..The Board DOESN'T RIDE THE SUBWAY..and only just begun to make strides to "improve" it since DOOMSBURG made his congestion pricing pitch. And these are the people IN CHARGE of OUR DAILY COMMUTE. |
|
|
| (455332) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by metropod on Tue Jul 3 12:26:38 2007, in response to Re: Culver Express Service, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jul 3 11:55:55 2007. a (some what) normal R46 F sign"F-6ave/63rd st lcl" "F-Culver Lcl" "f-Coney Island" even the map has the words "Culver Line" writen on it next to the line. (they also have west end, sea beach and brighton next to thier respective routes) |
|
|
| (455335) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Jul 3 12:34:14 2007, in response to Re: Culver Express Service, posted by metropod on Tue Jul 3 12:26:38 2007. And few people know that the "Culver" designation comes to an end north of Ditmas. |
|
|
| (455445) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Tue Jul 3 18:56:28 2007, in response to Re: Culver Express Service, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Jul 3 05:59:40 2007. I am refering to the 80's. today w/the V now you can have both 6th Av lines as either the Culver express or local. |
|
|
| (455647) | |
Re: Culver Express Service |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Wed Jul 4 00:54:38 2007, in response to Re: Culver Express Service, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jul 3 10:46:40 2007. Wasn't the line from Jay Street to Church Ave called the Brooklyn Line, before it was connected to the Culver el? I remember the old R1/9's used to have roll signs: B'KLYN- CHURCH AVE and B'KLYN- SMITH-9TH STREET. |
|
|
