|
|
| Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently (554375) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 3 of 20 |
||
|
| (554913) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Wed Jan 16 23:47:22 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. What time was this? When was this? I have never seen a (G) train with only 3 people after Queens Plaza northbound.He said in his car. From my observations as well, the G has likely less than twenty people when it leaves QP towards FH weekends, midday. |
|
|
| (554914) | |
Re: M/V combo on weekends |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 23:50:21 2008, in response to Re: M/V combo on weekends, posted by jsun21 on Wed Jan 16 23:41:24 2008. I don't know, but think I heard somehthing like that before. How long was the old C train from Bedford Park Blvd to Rockaway Park?As for the Chrystie Cut, the reason it's not used is not because it would have "low" ridership, because it would do a lot of good, and have very good ridership in fact. The reason they "don't" do it is just what you said, it's a service they "can do without" and don't want to deal with, and in a world of limited funds, it probably won't be done. They do their best to hide the fact it even exists. Most people living along the M or J don't even know it's even a possible routing, so that's what they don't push for it....they don't know it's even there. |
|
|
| (554915) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jan 17 00:03:10 2008, in response to 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. I agree that this could be sucky if they don't add to the R's frequency. But the R's connections are excellent. It hits Queens Plaza and it hits 59th St/Lex, a much better transfer point than 53rd St/Lex for the majority of riders (except disabled passengers, because 59th is not ADA compliant). |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (554919) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Thu Jan 17 00:20:24 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. Although I said I wasn't going to argue this any more, I feel that I should address this point:yes the majority does [want Manhattan service] but that does not mean that the minority doesn't. If you design a transit system based on giving preferential treatment to the few who would benefit from something rather than the majority of people who would not, you're not getting anywhere. Case in point: I'd love it if the MTA instituted a bus line serving my block, with a stop in front of my house, serving the destinations I'd want to go to. I'm sure several of my neighbors would benefit from it as well. But the majority of bus riders in the city would have little or no use for this bus line, and it would actually be detrimental to them as money would be going toward my bus line rather than to the "real" lines. "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." Plus, you can always transfer at Court Square. |
|
|
| (554920) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jan 17 00:25:46 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by The Port of Authority on Thu Jan 17 00:20:24 2008. Agreed. |
|
|
| (554944) | |
Re: M/V combo on weekends |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Jan 17 01:15:45 2008, in response to Re: M/V combo on weekends, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 23:50:21 2008. Exactly:I never knew it was there myself until I saw it noted on the nyc.subway.org site a couple of years ago (and also saw it on the old KK line). If the Amtrak strike happens, however, then it will be noticed, and I suspect there will be some official somewhere who will push for it to be used full-time, especially if they are smart enough to realize the potential for example of the M-V merger. |
|
|
| (554946) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Jan 17 01:20:43 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 23:26:52 2008. Exactly:Perhaps at one time it was needed, but especially since you now have the MetroCard (and eventually in-system) transfer between the G and 7 (in addition to the E/F), it is really no longer necessary to have the G run to Queens Plaza. |
|
|
| (554983) | |
Re: M/V combo on weekends |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Thu Jan 17 04:43:53 2008, in response to Re: M/V combo on weekends, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Jan 17 01:15:45 2008. A replacement service in case of an Amtrak strike would probably be more like a J/V merger but at least people along the line would discover the connection and demand it as a permanent service in some form even after the strike. |
|
|
| (554994) | |
Re: M/V combo on weekends |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Jan 17 05:36:54 2008, in response to Re: M/V combo on weekends, posted by SMAZ on Thu Jan 17 04:43:53 2008. True about it being a J/V combo, but the point is as you said, people WILL realize there IS such a connection, and if anyone is smart enough to realize such a connection, they will hopefully demand such be used along either the J or M (with the M more logical for reasons well discussed). |
|
|
| (555002) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Thu Jan 17 06:22:25 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Wed Jan 16 21:40:57 2008. The obvious thing would be to combine it with the Q. Yes, I know that would look really weird on the map... |
|
|
| (555007) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Thu Jan 17 06:37:10 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jan 17 00:03:10 2008. But the R's connections are excellent.Apart from not having a transfer to -- you guessed it -- the G train. |
|
|
| (555019) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Thu Jan 17 07:26:08 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 23:26:52 2008. 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. No it's not, even the Rockaway Park Shuttle gets 8 cars during the summer, and ALL of its stops are on the bottom 23 list in ridership IINM, meanwhile the (G) train has only 1 (on the list). It's not supposed to be 10 minute headways, but a lot of times it is because the service is too crappy, especially on weekends when it does that OPTO shenanigans. At least (M) gets full trains 5 days a week and on the weekends it gets new tech trains the size of a (G) even during the rush, and at least its Manhattan connection is right across the platform. 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. No it's not, as a (G) train rider, I am now immune to all "I don't wanna transfer across the platform, I want a one-seat ride!" complaints (with LIRR Brooklyn service sort of exempt to that). You're right that just because the connection exists, that doesn't mean the service there should be used, but if trains do use the connection and it gets good ridership while providing more options to both lines on either end, I don't think it should be taken away. |
|
|
| (555038) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Thu Jan 17 07:56:57 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Jan 17 01:20:43 2008. Not true at all, I guess you never really use that Court Square-23rd-Ely transfer often. |
|
|
| (555042) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Thu Jan 17 08:02:57 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by The Port of Authority on Thu Jan 17 00:20:24 2008. If you design a transit system based on giving preferential treatment to the few who would benefit from something rather than the majority of people who would not, you're not getting anywhere.You are getting somewhere, the majority gets their service, and the minority gets their service too, everyone is happy. Case in point: I'd love it if the MTA instituted a bus line serving my block, with a stop in front of my house, serving the destinations I'd want to go to. I'm sure several of my neighbors would benefit from it as well. But the majority of bus riders in the city would have little or no use for this bus line, and it would actually be detrimental to them as money would be going toward my bus line rather than to the "real" lines. At least the bus service never existed and isn't being taken away from you for some bulls*** reasons. "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." Plus, you can always transfer at Court Square. The (G) is not the "few" though, it's just the minority, also the Court Square-Ely Avenue transfer is hell, especially during the rush when the staircases are all clogged up. |
|
|
| (555062) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Thu Jan 17 09:02:17 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Osmosis Jones on Wed Jan 16 16:19:56 2008. True..Yet having the G terminate at C/S isn't a problem for me NOW..since I use the 7 to TIMES SQUARE. My ONLY problem is the short trains... It doesn't make sense. Case in point.. There are now enough R160's in service.that you can pull sets of R40S/R42CI cars FROM SERVICE and "SEMI RETIRE" THEM? Why not USE THEM for G service or at least place them in Jamaica..so they CAN be used to increase service? |
|
|
| (555103) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jan 17 09:46:05 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Edwards! on Thu Jan 17 09:02:17 2008. I agree with that. The cut to Court Square should coincide with longer trains. That, in addition to perhaps a little more freguend headways would do a lot more to serve the majority of G riders than having it running on Queens Blvd. |
|
|
| (555107) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jan 17 09:54:22 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Osmosis Jones on Thu Jan 17 08:02:57 2008. You are getting somewhere, the majority gets their service, and the minority gets their service too, everyone is happy.There are only a limited amount of funds available. It does way big more good for using that money somewhere else where it will enhance more people's commute than spending it on a part of a line that has relative low use. The money is better spent expanding R sevice to Queens Blvd, or V service, etc. At least the bus service never existed and isn't being taken away from you for some bulls*** reasons. It's not bullshit reasons, the money is better spent on something that will serve more people. The (G) is not the "few" though, it's just the minority, also the Court Square-Ely Avenue transfer is hell, especially during the rush when the staircases are all clogged up. There are plenty of hellish transfers in the system that people have to use. It's Hellish to live along the J or M lines when you want midtown service, and your train goes down Nassau. That's life. |
|
|
| (555108) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Fytton on Thu Jan 17 09:54:42 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. '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.' I don't believe the MTA has a aparticular bias against the riders of any particular line. They want: (a) To give Queens Boulevard local riders the destination that the large majority of them want to go to (Manhattan), even at times when there are G.O.s reducing the capacity of the Queens Blvd line at nights and weekends; (b) to increase the frequency and reliability of the G line without needing more trains and crews. |
|
|
| (555111) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jan 17 09:56:42 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Osmosis Jones on Thu Jan 17 07:56:57 2008. I know very well what that Ely transfer is. But he's right. The G is not needed on Queens Blvd. Those stations are way better servied with Manhattan locals. Yes, it's unfortunate the G can't at least turn at Queens Plaza, but it can't, so Ely it is. |
|
|
| (555113) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jan 17 10:00:45 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Osmosis Jones on Thu Jan 17 07:26:08 2008. At least (M) gets full trains 5 days a week and on the weekends it gets new tech trains the size of a (G) even during the rush, and at least its Manhattan connection is right across the platform.Most M riders have a three seat ride all the time because their lines don't go to Midtown where most people want to go. Most abandon the M at Wyckoff already (and that transfer is no prize either) to take the L. M riders also have a connection that would make many of them have a convenient 1 seat ride if not a convenient 2 seat ride, yet that connection isn't used either. (And I know many can have two seat rides if they would use the Nassau transfers, but that means going roundabout all the way down to go back up again, so that's why they chose the 3 seat L option). And the M's headways are certainly not any better than the G's. |
|
|
| (555114) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jan 17 10:02:09 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Osmosis Jones on Thu Jan 17 08:02:57 2008. The transfer at Court Square is easier than the transfer at 53rd/Lex. It's also easier than the transfer from the A at 42nd St to the 7 at Times Square.Other than that, I agree with Chris 38's remarks. G riders are not getting shafted; they are getting service to both Queens and Brooklyn in a way that maximizes the availability of resources to everyone and matches service to demand. This year, you'll see MTA studying the Queens Blvd corridor again because of the rezoning and redevelopment of the Hillside Av corridor (increased housing density). MTA may come up with new proposals to increase subway service, namely extension of existing lines or building new capacity. |
|
|
| (555115) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jan 17 10:04:10 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Fytton on Thu Jan 17 09:54:42 2008. I don't believe the MTA has a aparticular bias against the riders of any particular line.Of course not. Only people that love to wollow in a pity party think that. They want: (a) To give Queens Boulevard local riders the destination that the large majority of them want to go to (Manhattan), even at times when there are G.O.s reducing the capacity of the Queens Blvd line at nights and weekends; (b) to increase the frequency and reliability of the G line without needing more trains and crews. That's exactly it. The G is better served once it can increase frequency and length of the trains with the trains freed up from the Queens Blvd segment, a segment only a small amount of people use anyway. Most of the G's use on Queens Blvd was for the purpose of jumping from a local station to an express station along Queens Blvd, not for people going through to Brooklyn. That purpose serves those stations much better with a Manhattan local. |
|
|
| (555116) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jan 17 10:05:54 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Osmosis Jones on Thu Jan 17 07:26:08 2008. "It's not supposed to be 10 minute headways, but a lot of times it is because the service is too crappy, especially on weekends when it does that OPTO shenanigans."That's a legitimate complaint, and MTA is fixing that. G service is in fact being expanded by increasing frequency of trains. "but if trains do use the connection and it gets good ridership while providing more options to both lines on either end, I don't think it should be taken away" Since the G line cannot provide those options on Queens Blvd., MTA's decision to take it away was appropriate. |
|
|
| (555118) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jan 17 10:07:05 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jan 17 10:04:10 2008. Agreed.Hey, we're agreeing with each other consistently with this thread...hmm... |
|
|
| (555120) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Fytton on Thu Jan 17 10:13:43 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jan 17 10:02:09 2008. 'This year, you'll see MTA studying the Queens Blvd corridor again because of the rezoning and redevelopment of the Hillside Av corridor (increased housing density). MTA may come up with new proposals to increase subway service, namely extension of existing lines or building new capacity.'And those proposals may even become a reality during the lifetime of our great-great-grandchildren! |
|
|
| (555123) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Thu Jan 17 10:18:14 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jan 17 09:56:42 2008. The strongest point that G riders can raise is that during late nights, due to the uniform infrequency of service on all routes, G trains should terminate at Queens Plaza. (Unless, say, NYCT doubled late night frequency of service on the E route). |
|
|
| (555127) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jan 17 10:21:16 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by trainsarefun on Thu Jan 17 10:18:14 2008. Yeah, I would agree with that. That's the only straw I see that they could grasp onto. |
|
|
| (555139) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jan 17 10:28:05 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Osmosis Jones on Thu Jan 17 07:26:08 2008. The point is that it doesn't get good ridership relative to other service that could be used with that same equipment and money. It would be nice if the R went all the way to Jamaica Center too providing the "more options on either end" you feel every line should have, but that doesn't mean it would be a good use of infastructure, crews, and money. |
|
|
| (555140) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jan 17 10:28:16 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Osmosis Jones on Thu Jan 17 07:26:08 2008. You're right that just because the connection exists, that doesn't mean the service there should be used, but if trains do use the connection and it gets good ridership while providing more options to both lines on either end, I don't think it should be taken away.The point is that it doesn't get good ridership relative to other service that could be used with that same equipment and money. It would be nice if the R went all the way to Jamaica Center too providing the "more options on either end" you feel every line should have, but that doesn't mean it would be a good use of infastructure, crews, and money. |
|
|
| (555142) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Jan 17 10:28:33 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by trainsarefun on Thu Jan 17 10:18:14 2008. There's no operational constraint preventing the termination of G service at Queens Plaza on nights and weekends. They won't do it because they want to ram home the fact that it cannot be done when the V train is running. |
|
|
| (555143) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Jan 17 10:30:13 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jan 17 10:00:45 2008. Some M's abandon it at Wyckoff. It isn't even half the ridership. Many M riders have a one seat ride to lower Manhattan. Manhattan doesn't end south of Canal St, you know. |
|
|
| (555156) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Thu Jan 17 10:40:48 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Jan 17 10:28:33 2008. They won't do it because they want to ram home the fact that it cannot be done when the V train is running.Of course, if that's NYCT's 'reason', it's not a reason at all. |
|
|
| (555170) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Fytton on Thu Jan 17 11:02:54 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by trainsarefun on Thu Jan 17 10:40:48 2008. 'They won't do it because they want to ram home the fact that it cannot be done when the V train is running.''Of course, if that's NYCT's 'reason', it's not a reason at all.' It isn't a good reason. But a better way of putting it might be that customers would be confused if it terminated at Court Sq at normal hours but at Queens Plaza in midnight hours. |
|
|
| (555172) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jan 17 11:04:24 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Jan 17 10:30:13 2008. It's more than some. It's probably even more than half at Wyckoff. But granted, yes, the trains begin filling up again right at Wyckoff with new people, and the trains are packed rush hours as they cross the bridge. However, the 2nd Exodus happens at Essex. There is more than "some" demand for the 6th Ave direct service. M riders are different than J riders. Most M riders bound for Broadway in Manhattan will not use Canal, but the L and Union Square. J and M riders share lots of the similar frustration with their services, but J riders are much more likely to accept their Nassau transfers than M riders are. "Some" J riders leave their J for the L at Bway Junction. "Many" more M riders do at Wyckoff.. |
|
|
| (555174) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Jan 17 11:09:44 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Jan 17 10:28:33 2008. The reason why they will not do it is because they do not want to interfere with the real trains running on that line. You *think* there is time to turn a train there at night, but no, there really is not. Trains do not run on time like a swiss watch, if one is a few minutes off either way, it will jack up the whole line. Besides, there are no crew facilities at Queens Plaza, no place for comfort, or a sip of water.Remember, we still have *people* running these trains, and the law *requires* that we give them a potty break in a clean, well maintained restroom. ROAR |
|
|
| (555176) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jan 17 11:27:42 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Jan 17 11:09:44 2008. Good point. |
|
|
| (555177) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jan 17 11:28:42 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Fytton on Thu Jan 17 11:02:54 2008. You could argue that tourists have enough difficulty as it is figuring out the subway. They don't need more. |
|
|
| (555179) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Thu Jan 17 11:43:10 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jan 17 11:28:42 2008. What tourist would ride the G train? |
|
|
| (555180) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jan 17 11:49:16 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Thu Jan 17 11:43:10 2008. Tourists and business visitors from out of town can end up on any subway line at any time. Not making the subway more complicated than necessary is important. And that applies to any line on the system, whether or not you "believe" there will be a tourist on it. |
|
|
| (555183) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by checkthedoorlight on Thu Jan 17 12:18:23 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Wado MP73 on Wed Jan 16 23:47:22 2008. There was one time when I was taking the G to Woodhaven Blvd. At Roosevelt Ave, EVERY person in my car exited, and 2 people got on, and then got off at Graham, leaving me as the only person left in the car when I got off. Although I doubt there is that much demand between the Crosstown stations and the local Queens Boulevard stops, having the G run on Queens Blvd does give extra support from those coming from the 7, or from the E/F who want to get to their local stop. Of course, if they're going to run more R trains to replace the lack of G service, that would serve the same purpose.I am a daily G rider. Yes, most of the time I am going to Manhattan. However, I am almost ALWAYS going to the 7, E/V (to both Manhattan and Jamaica LIRR) or L. I can only think of ONE time I needed direct R service, and that time happened to be a weekend the G was running to Forest Hills. Strangely enough, I often find myself taking the R TO Queens, which requires me to double back on the E/V first. The last time I did that, I randomly ran into G1Ravage. Anyway, I still feel that this change is a GOOD move, because what I desire more than direct access to Queens Boulevard is more frequent service. 8-10 minute headways during rush hour and middays, and 12-15 minute headways as soon as the sun goes down and often on weekends just doesn't cut it, particularly when almost every rider is going to have to make at least one transfer to get to their final destination. I'd gladly sacrifice station access that we NEVER get in the first place in order to give us less waiting time between trains. Also, extending the G to Church Ave is more important than extending to Forest Hills. This is because of the 4 Av station. The transfer to the R train there is the ONLY direct transfer that the G has to most of the rest of lower Brooklyn. The F train does not have direct connections to Atlantic-Pacific, Dekalb, Borough Hall (well, Jay St, but that station is not yet connected to the complex station) or 4 Av, so if your destination is along any of these, or anywhere else along the 2/3/4/5/B/Q/D/N, it takes forever to get back to the G, unless you have an unlimited card and do the 5 minute walk between Atlantic and Fulton St. The R to F to G transfer is horrible, and it's also mind torture because you can often see the G either layed up on the express track, or bypassing the station on the express track, and stop at Smith-9 before the next F comes, and then you know you have to wait a full interval to get the next G. Connecting the R and G at 4 Av is going to make many riders' lives much easier, including mine. The next step the MTA needs to take to fix the G is installing SOME kind of transfer between Brodaway G and Lorimer St J/M. These stations are almost right on top of each other, and there are even street signs pointing you between the two stations, yet you can only do that transfer with an unlimited card. The G and the J/M aren't exactly the most desirable lines, but this transfer would really open up some travel possibilities for many riders too. Installing an in-system walkway might be more expensive than it's worth, but why can't these stations use the same system as 59-63 Sts and Court Square? |
|
|
| (555185) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Thu Jan 17 12:19:58 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jan 17 11:49:16 2008. The only reason I could see for a tourist ending up on the G train is an hypothetical cheap hotel. Have you got a specific other reason in mind, or is your opposition to complicated service patterns purely ideological? |
|
|
| (555203) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Thu Jan 17 13:20:34 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Thu Jan 17 12:19:58 2008. It's fun to stay at the... |
|
|
| (555204) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jan 17 13:21:58 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Thu Jan 17 12:19:58 2008. "The only reason I could see for a tourist ending up on the G train is an hypothetical cheap hotel."There are indeed cheap hotels in Brooklyn and Queens. Not everybody can afford the Ritz Carlton. Notice that I also said business visitors. They are not tourists (but they could be if they stay for longer than business requires). Another reason is, frankly, that extending the G train costs more $$ for crews and that expense is neede elsewhere. It sounds like your reasoning regarding the G train is ideological. Mne is about demand, customer-friendly planning and budget consideations. The more exceptions you make to rules (this train goes to A except late nights when it goes to B, and holidays when it goes to C) the less riders like it. And that doesn't just include visitors. Al riders complain about stuff like that. |
|
|
| (555205) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jan 17 13:22:53 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Wado MP73 on Thu Jan 17 13:20:34 2008. And people do, else there would be no need for it. |
|
|
| (555222) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Mark S. Feinman on Thu Jan 17 13:54:39 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Mr. D - Type on Wed Jan 16 14:01:11 2008. With all the new equipment that is coming in, why aren't 4 car G-trains extended back to 8 cars?--Mark |
|
|
| (555234) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jan 17 14:21:06 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Fytton on Thu Jan 17 11:02:54 2008. It isn't a good reason. But a better way of putting it might be that customers would be confused if it terminated at Court Sq at normal hours but at Queens Plaza in midnight hours.But that is a good reason. It would confuse people, so that's why they won't do QP at off peak times. |
|
|
| (555236) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jan 17 14:21:42 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jan 17 11:28:42 2008. Yeah, "all" the tourists that use the G train. |
|
|
| (555238) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jan 17 14:22:53 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jan 17 11:49:16 2008. You premise is correct, but this is the G train.What does the G train get, one stray tourist a month? |
|
|
| (555240) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jan 17 14:25:21 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Thu Jan 17 12:19:58 2008. Ideologically he is correct, but not about "tourists" on the G line. The M, J, and G see the least amount of tourists out of any of the lines. The G is probaly rock bottom, with the M just above that, and the J just above that. |
|
|
| (555242) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Jan 17 14:29:44 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jan 17 13:21:58 2008. There are indeed cheap hotels in Brooklyn and Queens. Not everybody can afford the Ritz CarltonOf course there are, but not along the G train. They are just slightly starting to pop up along the L line (such as at Halsey), but the L train is a few steps ahaead of the G for tourist travel, and even the L is a relative low use tourist line, and it's even light years ahead of the G with that. Notice that I also said business visitors. They are not tourists (but they could be if they stay for longer than business requires). Still not really many hotels, if any along Layaette St, Marcy, Union, etc. Another reason is, frankly, that extending the G train costs more $$ for crews and that expense is neede elsewhere Yes, that's more like it, not "tourist" confusion in this particular case. The more exceptions you make to rules (this train goes to A except late nights when it goes to B, and holidays when it goes to C) the less riders like it. And that doesn't just include visitors. Al riders complain about stuff like that. Of course, your premise is absolutely correct. Just don't use "tourist" and "G Train" in the same sentence, and you are fine. |
|
|
|
Page 3 of 20 |
||
