|
|
| Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently (554375) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 2 of 20 |
||
|
| (554705) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Kriston Lewis on Wed Jan 16 17:38:32 2008, in response to G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 16 06:11:59 2008. Old news, but I saw this miles away. Those GOs were practice runs.I kind of wanted it off the Queens Boulevard Line anyway in favor of increased Manhattan bound service. |
|
|
| (554711) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Wed Jan 16 17:48:12 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Kriston Lewis on Wed Jan 16 17:38:32 2008. "Those GOs were practice runs."The TA's practice runs were Monday-Friday of every week for close to seven years. |
|
|
| (554713) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 16 17:49:49 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 12:06:16 2008. And there is also a transfer to the 7 at Court Square anyway (currently by MetroCard and I believe eventually as a regular transfer as well). |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (554714) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Wed Jan 16 17:49:54 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 17:08:59 2008. Exactly, my point, next argument. |
|
|
| (554718) | |
Re: V trains on weekends |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 16 17:56:10 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by The Port of Authority on Wed Jan 16 16:49:40 2008. As for the V trains:I think if the V were combined with the M train, then I can see the combined line from Metropolitan to 71st-Continental (via Chrystie Street after Essex) become at least a 19/7 if not a 24/7 line (with if not 24/7 a truncated M-V to West 4th during overnights). That to me I think would be the way that would happen. As it is, I believe the R is supposed to add service along Queens Blvd. and become a 24/7 train. |
|
|
| (554720) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Kriston Lewis on Wed Jan 16 17:56:52 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by RonInBayside on Wed Jan 16 17:48:12 2008. December 2001-present |
|
|
| (554722) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 16 17:58:50 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 17:08:59 2008. Not to the 7 from the G:You can only do that at Court Square via Metrocard (and eventually, that will be a regular transfer as well). |
|
|
| (554723) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Wed Jan 16 17:58:56 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by The Port of Authority on Wed Jan 16 16:49:40 2008. You're forgetting the useful transfer at 4th Avenue.Sure it's a benefit, but few people would use the transfer from a southbound (G) onto a northbound (R) (and vice-versa), and there are not that many people who commute from the Crosstown line to points on the 4th/Sea Beach/West End lines south of 9th Street. The G on Queens Boulevard really serves no purpose. That's a lie and you know it, people from the Crosstown line use the Queens Boulevard line for the (R) connection to Manhattan, direct service to Jackson Heights (where there is also bus service to LaGuardia Airport), Jamaica (sure you can transfer at Court Square, but why transfer there if the Queens Plaza connection is way easier?), and Queens Center Mall to name a few reasons. I saw a weekend Manhattan-bound G arrive at Roosevelt Avenue once, and although it was packed, virtually everyone got off at Roosevelt to transfer to the express. I'm pretty sure that the (V) and (R) are like that too. What's needed is weekend V or expanded R service to replace the G on Queens Boulevard. No, what's needed to replace the (G) on Queens Boulevard is nothing. |
|
|
| (554726) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 16 18:09:37 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Michael549 on Wed Jan 16 15:29:12 2008. That is true Mike. The planners did not think about more Queens-to-Manhattan tunnels, and as seen with the SAS and 7 line extension, money is not easy to come by these days.Also, nowadays you also have the transfer to the 7 from the G at Court Square, which is an option G riders (as well as E and F riders) did not have previously. |
|
|
| (554738) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Wed Jan 16 18:24:34 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Osmosis Jones on Wed Jan 16 17:58:56 2008. Sure [the transfer's] a benefit, but few people would use the transfer from a southbound (G) onto a northbound (R) (and vice-versa), and there are not that many people who commute from the Crosstown line to points on the 4th/Sea Beach/West End lines south of 9th Street.You could probably make the same point about the people who commute from the central portion of the Crosstown line to the Queens Boulevard line. In any case, Church Avenue is a much more effective terminus for the G than Smith/9th is. F service won't back up as a result of fumigating G trains on the southbound local track. That's a lie [that the G on Queens Boulevard really serves no purpose] and you know it, people from the Crosstown line use the Queens Boulevard line for the (R) connection to Manhattan, direct service to Jackson Heights (where there is also bus service to LaGuardia Airport), Jamaica (sure you can transfer at Court Square, but why transfer there if the Queens Plaza connection is way easier?), and Queens Center Mall to name a few reasons. I'd like to see some statistics that prove this. I agree with you, Queens Plaza is a much more convenient terminus for the G than Court Square is, but you can't turn trains effectively at Queens Plaza. You've already got the MetroCard transfer to the 7 at Court Square, which, the last time I checked, isn't a bad transfer option at all. I'm pretty sure that the (V) and (R) are like that too [mass exodus at Roosevelt to transfer to the express]. Which proves my point that Queens Boulevard riders want Manhattan, not Crosstown service. If they were content with the G they would have stayed on until past Queens Plaza. (And plus, R trains are the only Queens Boulevard trains that serve Broadway, so passengers wanting Broadway destinations are likely to stay on the R.) No, what's needed to replace the (G) on Queens Boulevard is nothing. Not quite. |
|
|
| (554747) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Wed Jan 16 18:38:27 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by The Port of Authority on Wed Jan 16 18:24:34 2008. You could probably make the same point about the people who commute from the central portion of the Crosstown line to the Queens Boulevard line.No you can't, the (G) is the way more efficient option at that part of the line too. In any case, Church Avenue is a much more effective terminus for the G than Smith/9th is. F service won't back up as a result of fumigating G trains on the southbound local track. Agreed. I'd like to see some statistics that prove this. You don't need to, just ride the train and observe where people get off yourself like I did. I agree with you, Queens Plaza is a much more convenient terminus for the G than Court Square is, but you can't turn trains effectively at Queens Plaza. You've already got the MetroCard transfer to the 7 at Court Square, which, the last time I checked, isn't a bad transfer option at all. I'm not asking to end trains at Queens Plaza, as a matter of fact, I think that Queens Plaza is a bulls*** terminal (not as much as Court Square, but pretty close), might as well send it to Forest Hills. Which proves my point that Queens Boulevard riders want Manhattan, not Crosstown service. If they were content with the G they would have stayed on until past Queens Plaza. (And plus, R trains are the only Queens Boulevard trains that serve Broadway, so passengers wanting Broadway destinations are likely to stay on the R.) Well, my statement did not prove that point IMO but I will argue anyways. Why would they stay on until Queens Plaza if they wanted express service to Manhattan and the (G) was a local to Brooklyn? Also, you're right that the majority of Queens Boulevard riders do want Manhattan but that doesn't necessarily mean that the riders that want the Crosstown are nonexistent, if they were, the (G) wouldn't go there in the first place. |
|
|
| (554748) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Eric B on Wed Jan 16 18:43:45 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Osmosis Jones on Wed Jan 16 16:14:49 2008. The other rumor is that the CI-based G would run the 160A-2's (the 60 car quantity apparently made just enough to cover the line). I too would rather see those over there than the 68's. (ESPECIALLY with it being OPTO!) |
|
|
| (554750) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Wed Jan 16 18:47:32 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Osmosis Jones on Wed Jan 16 18:38:27 2008. You don't need to, just ride the train and observe where people get off yourself like I did.As a matter of fact, I did that once when the G was running from Smith/9th to Forest Hills once. I rode from Bergen Street all the way to Forest Hills. Most people got off at Metropolitan Avenue/Grand Street, Court Square, or Queens Plaza to transfer to a Manhattan-bound train. The total number of people that stayed in my car after Queens Plaza was 3, and it probably diminished after that. I'm not asking to end trains at Queens Plaza, as a matter of fact, I think that Queens Plaza is a bulls*** terminal (not as much as Court Square, but pretty close), might as well send it to Forest Hills. Queens Plaza would work as a terminal if the necessary structural improvements were made, but I see no benefit of going any farther along Queens Boulevard. Well, my statement did not prove that point IMO but I will argue anyways. Why would they stay on until Queens Plaza if they wanted express service to Manhattan and the (G) was a local to Brooklyn? Read my post. I said after, not until. I'll say it again: "...that Queens Boulevard riders want Manhattan, not Crosstown service. If they were content with the G they would have stayed on until past Queens Plaza." As we don't seem to be getting anywhere by debating this subject, I'm ending my argument here. |
|
|
| (554754) | |
Re: M/V combo on weekends |
|
|
Posted by Eric B on Wed Jan 16 18:54:27 2008, in response to Re: V trains on weekends, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 16 17:56:10 2008. Now; I have just worked out a concept for starting up a weekend M/V combo, and without even having to use Jamaica equipment!It would take about 3 hours to make the entire round trip from Met to Continental, and if at 10 minute headways, then requiring about 18 trains. Or if 12 minutes, then 15, etc. Sometime in the mornings, some through trains would start out from Met. Then, some would also start out at ENY Yard or borrow the J's stored at Canarsie even, if necessary, run light to Myrtle middle, then go in service towards Met, and then head off to Manhattan. Not only would this provide the necessary staging (since Fresh Pond Yd cannot hold 18 trains), but it would also provide the northound service to Met when the Manhattan bound trains are leaving and not returning yet, AND maintain the reverse "peak" shuttle, since the through trains from Manhattan to Met would not be needed earlier on. (and you wouldn't even have the alternate shuttle and through trains you have during the brief weekday transition from shuttle to Manhattan service!) The first train would complete its round trip, around the time the putins would cease. Of course, the evening transition back to the shuttle would be the reverse. If you still think that much service is not needed, then there is always the possibility of using short trains. Eventually it will all be 160's, so just cut some and take those out. (This might also raise the question of making it OPTO, and that might be attractive to them, as it is less staff, but then that would be an awful long line for OPTO). For evenings, I always thought it would be nice to have the midtown service as well, but the V is still running, and you have less time to stage the service like that. Plus, I'm sure they will not want to take the chance of confusing the Jamaica based equipment with the ENY based equipment if you had both services overlapping like that. (Like if there's a delay in the last Jamaica V of R46's, and it gets down to Bway-Laf. and Essex forgets to check, thinks it's an ENY R160 or whatever, and then brings it into Essex). So for evenings, it would be better to use 2nd Av. (96th, and eventually 72nd St. middle) when it is open. Instead of those last Broad St. runs, they would head up there, and by the time the first one returns, it can be adjusted to fall right behind the last train from Bay Pkwy. This would still overlap with the V, but at least it would be a separate line, and less likely to be confused with the V by Essex. (Call letters would have different line and starting terminal). So this would help both the M riders, and even the G riders heading for local stations in Queens, as well as giving them the direct 53rd St. and 6th Ave. access. |
|
|
| (554762) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Wed Jan 16 19:03:36 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by The Port of Authority on Wed Jan 16 18:24:34 2008. In any case, Church Avenue is a much more effective terminus for the G than Smith/9th is. F service won't back up as a result of fumigating G trains on the southbound local track.IINM, there's only one track accessible from the southbound local at Church too. |
|
|
| (554764) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Wed Jan 16 19:06:21 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by The Port of Authority on Wed Jan 16 18:47:32 2008. As a matter of fact, I did that once when the G was running from Smith/9th to Forest Hills once. I rode from Bergen Street all the way to Forest Hills.Most people got off at Metropolitan Avenue/Grand Street, Court Square, or Queens Plaza to transfer to a Manhattan-bound train. The total number of people that stayed in my car after Queens Plaza was 3, and it probably diminished after that. What time was this? When was this? I have never seen a (G) train with only 3 people after Queens Plaza northbound. but I see no benefit of going any farther along Queens Boulevard. Well I do, and so many other people do that there's even a website saying that it should (savetheg.org). Read my post. I said after, not until. I'll say it again: "...that Queens Boulevard riders want Manhattan, not Crosstown service. If they were content with the G they would have stayed on until past Queens Plaza." Thanks for clearing things up. Like I said, not all Queens Boulevard riders want Manhattan service, yes the majority does but that does not mean that the minority doesn't. As we don't seem to be getting anywhere by debating this subject, I'm ending my argument here. Fine, I will defend the (G) like a dog in a junkyard. |
|
|
| (554765) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Wed Jan 16 19:06:38 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by The Port of Authority on Wed Jan 16 17:20:10 2008. To make up for the loss of the G on Queens Boulevard, I'd also support the idea of creating a MetroCard transfer between Queens Plaza and Queensboro Plaza, much like what is in place between 45th Rd/Court House Sq and 23rd/Ely Avenue/Court Sq. The Queens Plaza station entrances are only a short walk from Queensboro Plaza.But why transfer there instead of at Courthouse Sq? The N/W across the platform at QBP totally pwn walking to the R train. |
|
|
| (554768) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Wed Jan 16 19:09:37 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Eric B on Wed Jan 16 18:43:45 2008. I agree, I suggested to the MTA that they should use the 4-car sets on the (G), combining them to make an 8-car set like in the old days. |
|
|
| (554774) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 19:16:13 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by The Port of Authority on Wed Jan 16 18:47:32 2008. Most people got off at Metropolitan Avenue/Grand Street, Court Square, or Queens Plaza to transfer to a Manhattan-bound train. The total number of people that stayed in my car after Queens Plaza was 3, and it probably diminished after that.That's been my observations too. While the G is a vital link to the area it goes through in Brooklyn, most of those people want Manhattan, not Queens Blvd. Sure, there are a few that travel between the QB line and Crosstown but it's only a very small percentage of the people that ride it), most get off at Metropolitan (to take the L), Court Square or Queens Plaza (to get Manhattan). I sympathize that Queens Plaza is easier than Court Square, but the G going further than that is nothing more than a steping stone to another line. The G's plight is not that it doesn't run on Queens Blvd, it's plight is that it doesn't go to Manhattan, but unfortunately, that was by design. |
|
|
| (554775) | |
Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Wed Jan 16 19:16:18 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 16 18:09:37 2008. That is true Mike. The planners did not think about more Queens-to-Manhattan tunnels, and as seen with the SAS and 7 line extension, money is not easy to come by these days.So what would you (or anyone else on Subchat) have designed in the 1920s if you had been in charge of planning the IND from a blank slate? Which lines would have been first system and which second? I have my own thoughts on this matter, but I will wait until contaminating this thread with them... |
|
|
| (554777) | |
Re: Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Wed Jan 16 19:18:01 2008, in response to Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Wed Jan 16 19:16:18 2008. Ya'll know my opinion on this - I would NOT have designed the IND: Long Live the BMT!!!! |
|
|
| (554778) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 19:18:18 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Osmosis Jones on Wed Jan 16 19:06:21 2008. Fine, I will defend the (G) like a dog in a junkyard.But no one is knocking the G. People are just arguning it's usefulness on Queens Blvd vs direct Manhattan routes on the QB local. |
|
|
| (554780) | |
Re: Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Wed Jan 16 19:20:30 2008, in response to Re: Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by BMTLines on Wed Jan 16 19:18:01 2008. Ya'll know my opinion on this - I would NOT have designed the IND: Long Live the BMT!!!!Okay, so where should the second Dual Contracts have gone? |
|
|
| (554786) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Wed Jan 16 19:29:06 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Wed Jan 16 19:03:36 2008. Oops, you're right. Should have checked the track map...However, an advantage to Church Avenue is that the switches are just beyond the station, rather than being right before the next station (as is the case with Smith 9th/4th Av.) |
|
|
| (554789) | |
Re: Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Kriston Lewis on Wed Jan 16 19:32:40 2008, in response to Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Wed Jan 16 19:16:18 2008. If there was an infinifte source of money, then everything goes everywhere. |
|
|
| (554790) | |
Re: Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 19:35:06 2008, in response to Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Wed Jan 16 19:16:18 2008. So what would you (or anyone else on Subchat) have designed in the 1920s if you had been in charge of planning the IND from a blank slate? Which lines would have been first system and which second?I know the FIrst IND System was designed thinking that the IND Second System would also be built, but here's some things different I would have done. - The Concourse Line was built just to "get rid" of the Jerome el. I would not have built the Concourse line so close to another line, when so many areas didn't even have subway service. (again, the IND 2nd System would have made the Concourse's use more apparent, but since hindsight is 20/20, I can think of a lot better things that could have been done with the money spent on Concourse. -The Fulton subway should not have been built. It replaced a perfectly good dual contracts el (for much of it's run). Duplicating existing lines instead of bringing the subway to areas that didn't have any service at all should not have been done first. (Again, I understand the Fulton subway is only a shadow of what it was supposed to be too, as it was supposed to be a major trunk line...however, had they built the further out portion first instead of wasting money replacing existing route, we would have a longer route now, in addition to the line already on Fulton St (which could have been connected to the Cranberry Tube). -The IND should have taken over the ENTIRE Rockaway line from Queens Blvd to Liberty Junction, and then onto to Rockaway. The loss of that middle section of Rockaway Line, through an area that has NO subway service is nothing short of travesty. -One of their major faults in design was that they thought that the locals should not go through to Manhattan, or out of borough. They figured people would just jump off the locals at the first express station they had the oportunity to, and take the express. This unfortunate design was responsible in 3 of the 4 boroughs for a plight we see to this day. For example, In Manhattan, the local is designed to feed out of Hudson Terminal. In Queens, the entire Queens Blvd local was designed to be just the Crosstown! Image the QB line without the 60th St Tunnel connection!! (also of course forgetting 63rd St). This unfortunate desing also made the people along the Crosstown suffer without direct Manhattan access (again, granted if IND 2nd System was built, this would have been eased a bit). The Fulton St subway's local service was only designed to terminate at Court St (Current Transit Museum)!! That's insane to think that the Fulton St local stations would only be prvided by a train that only went to Court St. They quickly saw the mistake with that, as right from the beginning, the Court St stub became a shuttle. But that probably has more to do with the fact that the Fulton St subway's construction was interrupted by WWII, and by the time it resumed, traffic patterns had already emerged. The IND we have today, is not bad. And it's easy to criticize what they "should have done", but the IND Second System was supposed to fill in a lot of the gaps and holes, and problems the original IND never finished or solved. It's a shame WWII interrupted it's progression, and it was never built as planned, as we would have some different subway system today had the IND Second System been built. |
|
|
| (554794) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Wed Jan 16 19:41:55 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 14:08:34 2008. The D train put-ins run on the Culver and start service at Broadway/Lafayette. |
|
|
| (554804) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 19:53:09 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Osmosis Jones on Wed Jan 16 17:49:54 2008. No, not next point at all. That doesn't change the fact that most people get off the G to get a Manhattan train. The only difference when it goes to Queens Blvd line is that they get off at Queens Plaza instead of Court Square. It's unfortunate it can't terminate at Queens Plaxa, so it has to be Court Square. |
|
|
| (554807) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 19:54:54 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by RonInBayside on Wed Jan 16 17:48:12 2008. They wanted to see how it would work on the weekend on the Queens Blvd line without the G. You can't judge the weekend based on the weekdays (when of course the R picked up slack). |
|
|
| (554816) | |
Re: Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Eric B on Wed Jan 16 20:13:04 2008, in response to Re: Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 19:35:06 2008. Court St. was designed to go through a new tunnel and rejoin with the local tracks at Hudson Terminal. |
|
|
| (554822) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Wed Jan 16 20:29:01 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 19:53:09 2008. That doesn't change the fact that most people get off the G to get a Manhattan train.You're right, it doesn't. The only difference when it goes to Queens Blvd line is that they get off at Queens Plaza instead of Court Square. Just because the majority doesn't ride it past Queens Plaza doesn't mean not a lot of people ride it. Supposedly the majority of (C) train riders are in Manhattan, yet in Brooklyn, the trains are still crowded, just maybe not as crowded in Manhattan. Sure, the Fulton Street line may get more ridership than Crosstown-Queens Boulevard service, but I still think it's a valid comparison as to traveling flexibility. It's unfortunate it can't terminate at Queens Plaxa, so it has to be Court Square. It could be Forest Hills, but the MTA just wants to screw over (G) riders. So much for the MTA going your way, now to go to places such as Flushing I have to go through Manhattan instead of taking the (G) to Jackson Heights. |
|
|
| (554823) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by checkthedoorlight on Wed Jan 16 20:30:16 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 14:08:34 2008. Yes. I saw an R68 on Crosstown last week. I even have PROFF:
|
|
|
| (554824) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by checkthedoorlight on Wed Jan 16 20:30:34 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 14:08:34 2008. Yes. I saw an R68 on Crosstown last week. I even have PROFF:
|
|
|
| (554829) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Wed Jan 16 20:44:28 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by checkthedoorlight on Wed Jan 16 20:30:16 2008. That's when 6th Ave was Jacked up due a a 12-9 at 34th Street..It was a homeless person being someplace he had no business being.. That Delta made sure he wont be doing that again... Parts of his body was on the platform i hear that he was hit so hard.. |
|
|
| (554857) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Wed Jan 16 21:40:57 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 13:46:20 2008. That would be useful...but would the G actually be run into Manhattan? Would it go down 6th Avenue? Broadway? |
|
|
| (554858) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Andrew Saucci on Wed Jan 16 21:42:46 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by The Port of Authority on Wed Jan 16 12:59:12 2008. "Surprisingly, the MetroCard transfer between the 7 and the G isn't that bad."In fact, I've noticed that the staircase from the 7 lands almost at the top of the staircase down to the G. With a bit of effort, it could perhaps be enclosed and maybe even placed inside fare control. One could even argue that apart from being outside fare control (MetroCard-only) it is an easier transfer than the E/V to G inside fare control. |
|
|
| (554865) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 16 22:08:44 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Andrew Saucci on Wed Jan 16 21:42:46 2008. As noted elsewhere, I believe that is supposed to become a non-Metrocard transfer down the road. |
|
|
| (554869) | |
Re: Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 22:21:45 2008, in response to Re: Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Eric B on Wed Jan 16 20:13:04 2008. Are you sure that was the original plan, or an after thought? I have read that both were always meant to be terminals. But I have heard the tunnel explanation on SubTalk, etc. |
|
|
| (554872) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 22:30:13 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Osmosis Jones on Wed Jan 16 20:29:01 2008. Just because the majority doesn't ride it past Queens Plaza doesn't mean not a lot of people ride it. Supposedly the majority of (C) train riders are in Manhattan, yet in Brooklyn, the trains are still crowded, just maybe not as crowded in Manhattan.Yes, but it's a different situation. The C train has two sets of riders. Those that just ride in Manhattan, and a LARGE amount that take the C to Manhattan from Brooklyn. But many, many people ride through from Brooklyn to Manhattan. In the case of the G train, you had enough people riding it ON Queens Blvd, and a lot of people riding IN Brooklyn, but most of the people that ride it on Queens Blvd, are not the same people that ride it in Brooklyn. Most people that ride it on Queens Blvd just rode it to get to Queens Plaza (or Roosevelt) to get a train to Manhattan. Most people that ride it in Brooklyn just rode it to Queens Plaza to get a train to Manahttan. It's the connection that's not necessarily needed, as the V solves the Queens Blvd problem, and the people from Brooklyn get off to take it to Manhattan anyway 9although, yes it's unfortunate it can't terminate at Queens Plaza). So, no, it's not a valid comparisan, as the Brooklyn C riders are not like the Brooklyn G riders. The majority of Brooklyn C riders stay on their train and take it through to destinations in Manhattan on the other end of their route. The Majority of Brooklyn G riders GET OFF their G trains to take another train before the train traverses the rest of it's route to the end. It could be Forest Hills, but the MTA just wants to screw over (G) riders. Oh please. So much for the MTA going your way Unfortunately, thanks to IND design, the G train NEVER goes where the vast majority wants to go, and "Forest Hills" isn't it either. |
|
|
| (554873) | |
Re: Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by error46146 on Wed Jan 16 22:31:16 2008, in response to Re: Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Eric B on Wed Jan 16 20:13:04 2008. that could be a possible plan, if you look out the RFW on the E today between Canal and Chambers-WTC, you see in the tunnel room for an extra track and tunnel turning away |
|
|
| (554878) | |
Re: Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 22:40:38 2008, in response to Re: Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by error46146 on Wed Jan 16 22:31:16 2008. That wasn't an original IND plan. Hudson Terminal and Court St were meant as terminals for their respective locals.Any plan to perhaps connect the two would have come later, and not original IND design. Here's the 1929 IND Second System plan (partial map), and it shows them as they were meant to be, terminals. 
|
|
|
| (554888) | |
Re: Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by error46146 on Wed Jan 16 22:59:22 2008, in response to Re: Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 22:40:38 2008. so what could that extra room for a tunnel be for? |
|
|
| (554892) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Wed Jan 16 23:08:37 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 22:30:13 2008. Yes, but it's a different situation. The C train has two sets of riders. Those that just ride in Manhattan, and a LARGE amount that take the C to Manhattan from Brooklyn. But many, many people ride through from Brooklyn to Manhattan. In the case of the G train, you had enough people riding it ON Queens Blvd, and a lot of people riding IN Brooklyn, but most of the people that ride it on Queens Blvd, are not the same people that ride it in Brooklyn. Most people that ride it on Queens Blvd just rode it to get to Queens Plaza (or Roosevelt) to get a train to Manhattan. Most people that ride it in Brooklyn just rode it to Queens Plaza to get a train to Manahttan.Alright, I get the point already, most Queens Boulevard riders are going towards Manhattan yada, yada, yada... But that still does not necessarily mean that not a lot of people ride it between Queens Boulevard and the Crosstown line. So what if not the majority of the passengers stay the same, as long as a good amount of people utilize the ride. It's the connection that's not necessarily needed, as the V solves the Queens Blvd problem. What problem? Walking across the platform to take an (E) or (F) train that comes almost instantly? Try watching the train leave in your face almost every day because it is too short, try watching one train skip your crowded station at least three times a week after waiting over 10 minutes for the train during the rush, or try walking through one too damn long corridor with a walkalator that barely works just to get to a Manhattan-bound train. So, no, it's not a valid comparisan, as the Brooklyn C riders are not like the Brooklyn G riders. The majority of Brooklyn C riders stay on their train and take it through to destinations in Manhattan on the other end of their route. The Majority of Brooklyn G riders GET OFF their G trains to take another train before the train traverses the rest of it's route to the end. ... Anyway, at least even though Brooklyn-Manhattan riders are the minority as opposed to Manhattan-Manhattan riders, the (C) train is not being cut back within Manhattan, sure the Brooklyn-Manhattan ridership may be higher on the (C) than Brooklyn-Queens ridership on the (G), but once again that does not mean that the service is underutilized. Oh please. Yes, since 2001. Unfortunately, thanks to IND design, the G train NEVER goes where the vast majority wants to go, and "Forest Hills" isn't it either. Sure "Forest Hills" isn't the top destination neither, but if the service goes there, and provides a unique service that people utilize, why cut service from there? |
|
|
| (554899) | |
Re: Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Jan 16 23:16:04 2008, in response to Re: Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by error46146 on Wed Jan 16 22:59:22 2008. If you look at the map that Chris posted you'll see a tunnel going east to Brooklyn and meeting with another tunnel (from Houston Street) at South 4th Street. Trains using this tunnel would have branched off BEFORE reaching Chambers or Hudson Terminal, so Hudson Terminal would still have been a terminal. |
|
|
| (554901) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 23:26:52 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Osmosis Jones on Wed Jan 16 23:08:37 2008. Try watching the train leave in your face almost every day because it is too short, try watching one train skip your crowded station at least three times a week after waiting over 10 minutes for the train during the rush, or try walking through one too damn long corridor with a walkalator that barely works just to get to a Manhattan-bound train.Unfortunately, that's the breaks of living along a lower use line. It's lower use because it doesn't go to Manhattan. And I know all about 10 minute headways, and lived through it. I was an M rider for many years, and the only ones crapped on more than G riders is M riders, so I don't need to hear a pity party. Sure "Forest Hills" isn't the top destination neither, but if the service goes there, and provides a unique service that people utilize, why cut service from there? Because the V service is more used and needed. Unfortunately the vast majority of G riders have to transfer anyway. That's just the way it was built. it's no different than the M not going to 6th Ave after Bway Lafayette, and even THAT would be used WAYYYYY more than the G between Queens Blvd and the Crosstown. Just because the G connection is there doesn't mean it needs to be used. |
|
|
| (554904) | |
Re: M/V combo on weekends |
|
|
Posted by jsun21 on Wed Jan 16 23:30:18 2008, in response to Re: M/V combo on weekends, posted by Eric B on Wed Jan 16 18:54:27 2008. Scheduled cab time cannot exceed two hours.There are J trains at Canarsie? Some trains lay-up in other yards over night(B,D,W come to mind). I doubt this M/V idea will get off the ground in any of its forms, Chrystie was cut because it was a service they could do without and it was eliminated to cut costs. With a fair hike coming I doubt spending money for more crews, cleaning up the tunnel, or actually having Essex Tower pay attention :-p is worth something that only avoids a transfer to give a one seat ride to 6 av. |
|
|
| (554905) | |
Re: M/V combo on weekends |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 23:34:57 2008, in response to Re: M/V combo on weekends, posted by jsun21 on Wed Jan 16 23:30:18 2008. It goes way beyond the Essex-Delancey transfer (and also effects L Myrtle-Wyckoff transfers), and it goes way beyond just 6th Ave service, but we have been through this topic before. |
|
|
| (554906) | |
Re: Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by (X) 2nd Avenue Local on Wed Jan 16 23:35:31 2008, in response to Re: Design your own IND Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Eric B on Wed Jan 16 20:13:04 2008. Perhaps, but they were built and functioned as initially intended--as terminals. |
|
|
| (554911) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by (X) 2nd Avenue Local on Wed Jan 16 23:40:21 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 11:03:55 2008. What are they planning to do on weekends on Queens Blvd? Why are they taking the G away, is the V or something replacing it weekends and nights?The (R) is, according to a slew of service changes being made by the MTA , will run at all times. The (V), unfortunately, will not run on weekends, leaving the (R) serving the Queens Blvd local by itself on weekends. |
|
|
| (554912) | |
Re: M/V combo on weekends |
|
|
Posted by jsun21 on Wed Jan 16 23:41:24 2008, in response to Re: M/V combo on weekends, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 23:34:57 2008. I know, I simplified. However was I right about the two hours scheduled or was that from an old contract? |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 20 |
||
