|
|
| Re: M-V combo (554375) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 12 of 20 |
||
|
| (557553) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Tue Jan 22 04:30:47 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by Wado MP73 on Mon Jan 21 17:16:35 2008. Wall Street and LMDC will quickly shoot this one down.Not if they are promised a connection to the SAS to replace the (M). They would then clamor for a SAS to Nassau connection. I would personally send the (V) on its own to Bway Jct and leave the (J/M/Z) as is for now with the exception of running the (J/Z) express between Bway Jct and Myrtle. |
|
|
| (557557) | |
Re: 3rd Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Tue Jan 22 04:42:26 2008, in response to Re: 3rd Avenue El, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Jan 21 14:10:30 2008. I think it can work over exclusively industrial areas too. Had 31st St in Astoria north of Ditmars not had those couple of residential blocks, a (N/W) extension to LGA could have been done. I don't think there was any particular opposition from the factory owners along 19th Av. They may even welcome a couple of new stations, say at Steinway and Hazen St. |
|
|
| (557569) | |
Re: 3rd Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Tue Jan 22 06:58:33 2008, in response to Re: 3rd Avenue El, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Jan 21 16:50:16 2008. The problem with any highway median line is that it's a PITA to get to the stations.Or, looked at the other way, the stations serve acres of asphalt and very few people. Somehow, I am reminded of the Richmond vs 59 saga in Houston, TX. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (557570) | |
Re: 3rd Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Tue Jan 22 07:01:10 2008, in response to Re: 3rd Avenue El, posted by SMAZ on Tue Jan 22 04:42:26 2008. I think it can work over exclusively industrial areas too. Had 31st St in Astoria north of Ditmars not had those couple of residential blocks, a (N/W) extension to LGA could have been done.It could still be done, given the amount of "redevelopment" going on in Queens. Just get a construction company sympathetic to (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) the airlines and the MTA to buy up those two blocks. Yes, I know that sounds very Tammany Hall... |
|
|
| (557571) | |
Re: SAS/four tracks |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Tue Jan 22 07:05:20 2008, in response to Re: SAS/four tracks, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Jan 22 01:24:02 2008. I'd actually suggest building just two, but stacking them. Then the cavern for the other half could be built at a later date, giving the correct cross-platform interchanges.In fact, it could be done in three phases: 1) western cavern, two tracks, Broadway Express 2) eastern cavern, only one level (the uptown level) fitted out, two-track SAS 3) fit out the other level, bore the deep lines |
|
|
| (557576) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 22 07:26:41 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by SMAZ on Tue Jan 22 04:30:47 2008. But they've already shot the SAS-Nassau connection down some years ago. They want the Water St. subway for SAS. |
|
|
| (557581) | |
Re: 3rd Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 08:25:57 2008, in response to Re: 3rd Avenue El, posted by SMAZ on Tue Jan 22 04:42:26 2008. I think the Astoria El extension could work if they break the el off at Astoria Blvd, and go to LGA over the Parkway. Ditmars would become a stub, bit you could have the N as the mainline going to LGA, and the W to serve Ditmars.But as I said, I can see it in or over Highways. |
|
|
| (557582) | |
Re: 3rd Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 08:28:59 2008, in response to Re: 3rd Avenue El, posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Tue Jan 22 06:58:33 2008. Or, looked at the other way, the stations serve acres of asphalt and very few people.I agree with that completely. I am not a big fan of "highway" rapid transit, as in most cases, it's a PITA to get to, as it's not particularly walkable like a neighborhood subway line is. It's a cheap way to extend lines (compared to subways), and it's "neater" than els, but subways under a street or an el serve neighborhoods much better than a median ROW. |
|
|
| (557583) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 08:30:46 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by SMAZ on Tue Jan 22 04:30:47 2008. While I love the idea of the J and Z running express on Broadway, a M/V would serve way more people than just a V to Bway Junction. The V to Bway Junction wouldn't have half the riders a V to Metropolitan Ave would have. |
|
|
| (557595) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 22 09:11:37 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by trainsarefun on Mon Jan 21 22:22:06 2008. I'd like to know but is there anything made public yet? |
|
|
| (557596) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Tue Jan 22 09:13:41 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by trainsarefun on Mon Jan 21 22:22:06 2008. Yes, they could, and if this scenario has been studied, then they likely already have have the answer. |
|
|
| (557602) | |
Re: 3rd Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 09:24:59 2008, in response to Re: 3rd Avenue El, posted by B47man on Mon Jan 21 23:39:58 2008. Why do think a lot of the parkways have low bridges? To keep buses off them!The parkways were designed in the 1920's, when streetcars and trolleys still ruled the roads. It could not have been know the extent that buses would take over in the coming decades. When it was saw that larger clearances were needed, Expressways began being built. Some parkways like the Clearview, Gowanas, and others were even converted from Parkways to Expressways. |
|
|
| (557604) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 09:26:28 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by AlM on Mon Jan 21 20:55:03 2008. I suspect there could be a real mess at the ends of the platforms at 53/Lex, Queens Plaza, and Roosevelt.Why? Have the train stop at the end. They have markers for that. Why would it have to stop in the middle of the platforms? |
|
|
| (557606) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 09:29:51 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by Wado MP73 on Mon Jan 21 22:11:07 2008. The demand is there because the majority want Nassau over Midtown, below Wyckoff in the morning rush.Why do you keep saying this? Where is YOUR proof of this? You keep asking for everyone else's "proof", yet you have not shown any written evidence that "the vast majority want Nassau"? do you think so many people moved there in the last ten years? Not because of the phenominal train service. They moved there because they were priced out of Manhattan, then priced out of Williamsburg, and now moving towards Bushwick. Cheaper rent is the reason they are coming in droves to Bushwick, that combined with Bushwick become a lot safer than years ago. And having "some" subway line is better than "no" subway line like some others that haven't seen the surge yet in population or improvement. |
|
|
| (557610) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Jan 22 09:47:59 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 09:29:51 2008. Exactly:It's the same reason why I would be looking at rebuilding the tracks leading to the as-present unused platform at Atlantic Avenue next to the one currently in service. While yes, it could screw up the CBTC on the Rockaway Parkway-Atlantic Avenue segment of the L, when that was planned and worked on, there was no way anybody could have realistically anticipated the massive growth in Brooklyn that now extends to Bushwick, which as noted is a big reason why the L has become as overcrowded as it is, and why what I would really want to do is if you can rebuild the tracks to the unused platform at Atlantic Avenue is during rush hours have L trains terminate there with a new K train that would replace the L from Rockaway Parkway-Atlantic Avenue before going via the Broadway Brooklyn line and replace the M in lower Manhattan and possibly to South Brooklyn (9th Avenue or Bay Parkway). It is also why the M-V combo would work, strengthening two lines as one that can operate 24/7 from Metropolitan to 71st-Continental, or 19/7 and during overnights from Metropolitan-West 4th. |
|
|
| (557611) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 09:49:04 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by Wado MP73 on Mon Jan 21 21:56:47 2008. The J can perfectly handle the volume of people using Nassau St. And if not, they can have a train coming in from South Brooklyn, let's say "The M" (because the Metropolitan route would probably be the orange V), which would be a rush hour only train running between Bay Parkway and terminating at Chambers St, or better yet, Essex St. The M only runs through from the Broadway El to Bay Parkway because it's the connection of two seperate groups using the same trains. Very few people ride the M from the Broadway El through Nassau, and then to the West End El. Most people either ride the Broadway El to Nassau and get off somewhere, or the West End/4th Ave to Nassau and get off somewhere. The Montague tunnel stretch is usually empty in the reverse peak direction of the M train currently. |
|
|
| (557614) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 10:09:56 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 09:29:51 2008. below Wyckoff in the morning rush.And that is because they don't have a choice. There are many people that reverse peak ride from Central Ave and Knickerbocker Ave to Wyckoff to get the L. Those are more Midtown people. From Myrtle-Bway to Marcy, they run to Nassau, and use one of the transfers on Nassau to transfer to their final destination route. THOSE people are also people effected by a direct 6th Ave train, and it's not just because of the 6th Ave line itself, but it's transfers. Many people riding from let's say "Lorimer" to the Broadway line take the M to Canal St. Under the direct 6th Ave service, many of those people would instead use that and use the 6th Ave line, as Bway's destinations in Midtown are quite similar to 6th Ave's, and a one seat ride is superior to a 2 seat ride. People from "Lorimer" destined for the 8th Ave line currently ride the M to Fulton St, and use the PITA transfer there (and go all the way south to do that) whereas with an M/V to 6th Ave, they have a very simple transfer at West 4th St, which is not rounadabout like going all the way to Fulton is. Lexington Service, they currently use either Canal or Chambers (again roundabout to go south just to go north again, and also a PITA transfer to an extent, will one day be able to use Bleecker-Bway-Lafayette when that connection is complete. 7th Ave line service, currently people from "Lorimer" take the M down roundaboutly to Fulton St (again, go south just to go back north again after transferring) to transfer in a PITA transfer to the 7th Ave line. Under a 6th Ave direct line, that transfer is moved up to 14th St. So YES, all these people want "Nassau St" but not because they want it's destinations, but because they want Nassau's TRANFERS to other lines. And they have no choice in the matter, and So, I have to laugh when people say this "only" has to do with people transferring at Essex (which is the usual excuse, and does have quite a few people), but it also has to do with people transferring at Wyckoff (which is a lot too), and it ALSO has to do with people transferring at other Nassau stations like Canal, Chambers, and Fulton (in addition to Essex). This goes WAY beyond just "Essex-Delancey" and "Direct 6th Ave line destinations". It has to do with ridership patterns all along the M/J line, and effects every line right down to the 7th Ave and 8th Ave lines, which most people don't even think of. |
|
|
| (557619) | |
Re: SAS/four tracks |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Tue Jan 22 10:20:28 2008, in response to Re: SAS/four tracks, posted by Russ on Mon Jan 21 17:34:02 2008. I like how you think. |
|
|
| (557637) | |
Re: SAS/four tracks |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Jan 22 10:39:57 2008, in response to Re: SAS/four tracks, posted by RonInBayside on Mon Jan 21 16:49:49 2008. On Time..?[Let me see..scheduled to open in 85 as far as Woodside..with further extension to Q.B by 88..Only opened to 21st in 89..Project funding delayed by UMTA/FTA..Due to "shady dealings"..Project studied and completed as far as Queens Blvd subway under Northern Blvd-no NORTHERN BLVD station as ORIGINALLY planned-opened as of 2001..Within budget..?[Gimme uh break!] You KNOW thats not a true statement..but Im giving the MTA PROPS..just because it FINISHED what it could of the route...leaving the Queens Bypass for later..IF there is a later. |
|
|
| (557642) | |
Re: SAS/four tracks |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jan 22 10:54:15 2008, in response to Re: SAS/four tracks, posted by Edwards! on Tue Jan 22 10:39:57 2008. They definitely missed the train - and the one after it, and the one after that, and the one after that, and.... - on completing the entire project, but as I recall the 'connector' project from Queensbridge to the interlocking at 36th St was completed more or less on schedule. (I forget if within budget). |
|
|
| (557648) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Tue Jan 22 10:59:39 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Jan 22 01:36:28 2008. This is also why I would have a K train that would replace the M in lower Manhattan and South Brooklyn that would start either at Eastern Parkway-Broadway Junction OR in place of the L at Rockaway Parkway I said before that this won't work because the existing infrastructure and operating procedures cannot support it. Just look at the track map and it should be obvious why this is the case. |
|
|
| (557655) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jan 22 11:06:45 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Tue Jan 22 10:59:39 2008. With more available trainsets and good scheduling, it might be possible to send selected pairs of J/Z trains to a Brooklyn terminal.The scheduling would seem complicated, though, especially in the northbound direction where skip/stop hours are in effect since the sequence J/Z/J/Z/... should be preserved. |
|
|
| (557659) | |
M/V Merger Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 11:21:06 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Wado MP73 on Mon Jan 21 19:52:08 2008. I believe we've always disagreed on this one. Why do riders south of Wyckoff have to be inconvenienced for the sake of the four stops in Ridgewood and Middle Village?How are they inconvenienced? First off, many people from Knickerbocker and Central "reverse" ride to Wyckoff. Second, read this post in this thread for the rest of them, no sense retyping it: http://www.subchat.com/read.asp?Id=557614 8th Ave Line - With the M/V combo line, they would have a very attractive, and easy transfer at West 4th St instead Two flights of stairs unless you're near the escalator. Is it very attractive when it may not be faster? Yes, but still a lot more attractive than the roundabout going all the way down to Fulton St, just to go back up again, and that transfer is far from a "dream" anyway even without the roundaboutness of getting there. Lexington Ave Line - However, with an M/V combo train, and once the Broadway-Lafayette-Bleecker connection is completely finished, they will have an attractive 2 seat ride option right there, thus making it more attractive than the 3 seat L/Wyckoff and Union Square option Even if the transfer is finished, it would not give transfer to the 4 and 5 expresses and the transfer is not there yet. Not so attractive, IMO. Yes, that's ONE transfer that is neither better nor worse. While it's not express, it's more direct (not going all the way tdown to Chambers) just to go north again on Lex. So I will give you the 4/5 transfer, but only as a "neutral" sort of advantage vs disadvantage. The Bleecker transfer to the 6 however is definitely an improvement over those that use Canal. Broadway Line - But with the M/V combo train, in a one seat ride going to the 6th Ave line, many of those riders will stay on the M, as the Bway Line's destinations in Midtown are very similar to the 6th Ave line's destinations, and a 1 seat ride is certainly superior to the current 3 seat ride set up they use with the L involved. Some will, some won't. Many people riding from local stations don't stay on locals on four-tracked lines even though it's a one seat ride if they did. Yes, we can leave it as "some will, dsome won't". But enough will to make it worthwhile. It all depends on the final walking destination. For some the 6th Ave line will only be an extra block from their Bway line station, for some it may be less. "Some will, some won't". But I guarantee that that extra block walk will be well worth it if their ride went from a 2 seat ride (or 3 if the L was involved) to a 1 seat ride using 6th Ave over Bway, will make it quite attractive. 7th Ave Line - And they will still have to trabsfer at 6th Ave/14th to get the 7th Ave line, however, they will be able to do it in a 2 seat ride instead of the L's three seat ride. The transfer from 6th Ave. is worse than from the L. Worse than the Fulton transfer. Yes it is. But this is taken out of context too. In the original post, I mentioned that they are probably not any better or worse off for 7th Ave line transferees using the L to 6th Ave, or the 6th Ave line to 14th St for a transfer to the 7th Ave line. However, other factors are involved in this, such as a THREE seat ride using the M, L, and then 7th Ave line is LESS attractive than a TWO seat ride using the 6th Ave service to 14th St for the similar transfer. That includes less waiting times, and one less transfer needed to be made....and BOTH of those scenerios are WAY better than using the Nassau line ALL THE WAY ROUNDABOUT to Fulton St, to use the nightmare PITA transfer at that station between the M and the 7th Ave line. Not only is that transfer a PITA on the scale probably worse than the transfer between the L and the 7th Ave line, but also a waste of time to go all the way south to Fulton just to go back north again after using that horrible transfer at Fulton St (via the Bway-Nassau platform no less). So yes, out of the three potential ways to transfer between the M line and the 7th Ave line (if the 6th Ave service is instated), the direct 6th Ave version is the most attractive, followed by the L scenario which today many use because they don't have the 6th Ave service), and certainly better than the horrible Nassau connection at Fulton. And this is GOOD for everyone It's not for Nassau St. bound people for sure. Sure it is, because as I mentioned, most people only use Nassau because of it's TRANFERS, not because of it's destinations, and in the post linked above I showed how the direct 6th Ave connections, if available, are more attractive than the Nassau transfers, even for those "south of Wyckoff" people. And J/Z riders will start playing the guess-which-platform game at Essex/Delancey even though the M/V combo service is an addition to current F service there. I don't understand. The southbound Nassau traffic will use the wall platform at Essex. Both the "M/V" and the J/Z will use the island platform at Essex, with the J/Z coming in on the middle track, and the "M/V" coming in on the side track. For reasons stated above, while it may take some slack from the L, I don't think the M/V combo riders will outnumber the Nassau St. bound people. And as I stated, all those supposed "Nassau" people are only using Nassau St because of it's transfers, (As stated in that link above), not for it's "destinations" outside fare control. And as I stated, this especially is relevant to the south of Wyckoff people, or more so, the south of Central Ave people who don't have the 2nd choice of the L, like the north of Wyckoff people do (or to a lesser extent Knickerbocker and Central Ave people do). The people at Lorimer and all them only used the Nassau line because of it's TRANFERS, not necessarily it's destinations. There are not a disproportionally more people that "work in the Financial District" along the J/M/Z lines than work there from any other line. In fact, it's probably less that have jobs in the Financial District that live along the Broadway El, Myrtle line, or even Jamaica. On top of that, you have to convince the Financial District and LMDC that a service cut is good for them. Good luck finding a way to create an M/V combo service without cutting service there. Agreed on that, but as I said, that can be rectifed with whatever will replace the West End El-Nassau St service. That can be done with the M (as the Orange V will be used for the Metropolitan service). The "M" could be a rush hour service from Bay Parkway to Chambers St, similar to the Brown R service that ran there until the late 80's. I think that would be a better alternative than using the J for Bay Parkway. The J should remain at Broad St. As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, very few if any people use the current M from the Broadway El, through Nassau, through Montague to 4th Ave and West End. Two entirely different groups use the Northern part of the M and the Southern rush hour version of the M. BTW, I like discussing this. Me too. |
|
|
| (557660) | |
Re: 3rd Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Tue Jan 22 11:29:36 2008, in response to Re: 3rd Avenue El, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 08:28:59 2008. "highway" rapid transit, as in most cases, it's a PITA to get to, as it's not particularly walkable like a neighborhood subway line is. If NYC ever did build such a line, they should look at WMATA's Orange Line segment in I-66 for some ideas. To work, it would have to coincide with a redevelopment program for one or two key locations along the route. That would likely spur similar efforts at other locations, and within a decade of opening, it should have enough regular ridership to make it worthwhile. When I first read about the LIE line, I envisioned a major facelift of the area between Queens Blvd and Flushing Meadow Park, since I knew the line would at least run there. The "me, too!" attitude would have naturally spread along the route. |
|
|
| (557661) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 11:35:34 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Grand concourse on Mon Jan 21 22:43:45 2008. Exactly. I never understand this "shorter trains" argument people have. First off, they are not "that" much shorter....only 120 feet. Next, they use markers to properly place a train on a platform where it will be most convenient to stop. In some stations, that could be at on e far end, in others, in the middle. I don't know why the "short train" argument people always assume the train has to stop right in the middle of the platforms.Third, the V's are not packed to capacity, and not close to full, so it should be fine. And fourth, which connects to "third", until recently the V wasn't even there at all, and people had to use the even shorter G that didn't even go to Manhattan, so I don't see how 8 car V's would be the problem people make it out to be. |
|
|
| (557662) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Jan 22 11:50:01 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Tue Jan 22 10:59:39 2008. There IS a thing called "Change"..The "Operating procedures" you speak of came into being during the city budget crisis..since that no longer applies here[due to the upcoming so called service increases],a merger of the V and M lines WOULD make sense. Of course..the "Problem" here is riders or transit fans perception of running 480ft cars along a busy line like 6th avenue and 53rd st.. That Being as it is..the V carries 600ft cars..and operates about 50 percent capacity..so what difference can running 8 60ft cars at 3 quarters full..compared to 8 75ft cars at half? A waste of train sets.. |
|
|
| (557664) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 22 11:52:54 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 09:29:51 2008. I have no proof. It's just from watching. We need some official figures there, and it would not bother me if proven wrong but until then I believe what I see.Not because of the phenominal train service. Because of the one seat ride to where they work. |
|
|
| (557665) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Jan 22 11:53:32 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jan 22 11:06:45 2008. The J SHOULD take over the M's WEST END schedule..More efficent service plan.. J to Bay Pky.. V to Metropolitan.. Z to Broad.[Z would become a separate line] |
|
|
| (557666) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Tue Jan 22 11:55:03 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 11:35:34 2008. When I moved to NYC in the early 1970s, the Queens Blvd locals were 480' (eight 60-footers) during the rush hours.The EE and GG were never anywhere as crowded as the E or F. When the N replaced the EE, it went to 600' (8-car R46/10-car anything 60'), but the GG stayed at 480'. The N was "busy" but never "crowded" until Queens Plaza. The GG all but emptied out at QP. From what I have read here over the years, it appears that the V is never so full on QB that it would suffer from trading 120' in favor of greater usefulness. |
|
|
| (557667) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Tue Jan 22 11:59:28 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Tue Jan 22 10:59:39 2008. Re-read what I wrote. I said Wallyhorse's insistence for a new service taking the place of the M to lower Manhattan/Brooklyn won't fly. |
|
|
| (557669) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Jan 22 12:06:43 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Tue Jan 22 11:59:28 2008. Oh..sorry Brah...I was responding to the wrong post...[still tired from one heck of a work week]...! |
|
|
| (557670) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 22 12:06:45 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 10:09:56 2008. I don't think too many people would go to Fulton to transfer for the uptown 7th and 8th Ave. trains so you could count those out from Nassau bound riders. |
|
|
| (557672) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Jan 22 12:13:47 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Jan 22 01:36:28 2008. Why do that..when you can just use the Z train as a replacement?J can operate as the express..the Z can be the local.. J operates non stop from Essex to Myrtle..Myrle to ENY.. Skip stop during rush hours to Jamaica. |
|
|
| (557674) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 22 12:28:12 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 09:49:04 2008. a rush hour only train running between Bay Parkway and terminating at Chambers St, or better yet, Essex St.While that means that the current service level is kept, that would create another guess that platform game. With that service, not only the J/Z riders will have to chose between the platform they're on and the uptown F platform, the V (as defined by your post) riders bound for Nassau will also have to chose between the platform they're on and the other platform (center track at Essex). |
|
|
| (557677) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 22 12:38:08 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 11:35:34 2008. I can't decide where to stop that short V at Fifth Ave., Madison side or Fifth side? Both are very busy during rush.At the other stations, it's rather obvious. |
|
|
| (557687) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 13:19:54 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 22 12:38:08 2008. At stations like that it may be better to stop in the middle, so neither side is too pronounced of a "hike". Signs could be placed on that particular platform saying "V's stop here". |
|
|
| (557688) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 13:21:25 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Tue Jan 22 11:55:03 2008. That's exactly the whole point. You are correct. People are making too big of a deal out of 8 car V trains. It's only 120 feet less, and it's not like the V is busy like the "Lexington Local" anyway. it's busy, but nothing that couldn't handle in 8 cars. |
|
|
| (557691) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 13:29:49 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Edwards! on Tue Jan 22 12:13:47 2008. That's good, but it makes it hard to operate proper skip stop, as J's and Z's would get out of sinc. For Skip Stop to perate properly you have to ALWAYS have alternating J's and Z's. With the scenario above of the J local and Z express, not to mention the Z and J's beginning at different terminals, you are bound to have double J's in a row, or double Z's in a row, which will throw off the whole skip stop set up east of Myrtle or Bway Junction. |
|
|
| (557692) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 13:33:45 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 22 12:06:45 2008. I don't think too many people would go to Fulton to transfer for the uptown 7th and 8th Ave. trains so you could count those out from Nassau bound riders.Why in the world would you say that? How can you just "disregard" the 7th and 8th Ave lines as destinations for any of those people? How do you think someone from "Lorimer St" gets the 8th Ave or 7th Ave lines? Or do you just assume no one from the Broadway El wants to ride to anywhere along the West Side? |
|
|
| (557694) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 13:36:37 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 22 12:28:12 2008. While that means that the current service level is kept, that would create another guess that platform game. With that service, not only the J/Z riders will have to chose between the platform they're on and the uptown F platform, the V (as defined by your post) riders bound for Nassau will also have to chose between the platform they're on and the other platform (center track at Essex).Huh? I don't understand. Guess the platform for what? Northward V's (now the combined M/V) and M's (South Brooklyn service) all are on the Northbound side, and visa versa for southbound. And at Essex, it's an Island platform. J's are on the middle track, and M/V combo on the outside track. What's there to guess, it's the same platform? |
|
|
| (557695) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 13:40:34 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 22 11:52:54 2008. I have no proof. It's just from watching. We need some official figures there, and it would not bother me if proven wrong but until then I believe what I see.So that it is just an assumption. But your assumption doesn't consider that a lot of those "Nassau" people are Nassau TRANSFER people, not Nassau "destination" people. And I explained how for most people that transfer along Nassau for Midtown would have it easier with the transfers to the same lines along the 6th Ave route than Nassau. Many only use the Nassau transfers now because that's their only choice, even if most of them are roundabout. The Nassau line is amazing, it has a transfer to just about every major trunkline....but unfortunately, most of them are roundabout, as you got to go all the way downtown just to go back up again on the trunkline of your choice. Because of the one seat ride to where they work. So we have some disproportionate amount of more people that work in the Financial District in Ridgewood and Bushwick than everywhere else? I don't think so. |
|
|
| (557700) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 22 13:47:48 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 13:33:45 2008. You made it sound like many Nassau bound riders transfer to uptown trains at Canal, Chambers and Fulton. Very few people would go down to Fulton, they change at Wyckoff or Essex. 7th and 8th Ave. riders are not Nassau bound riders. |
|
|
| (557720) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Tue Jan 22 14:38:32 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 13:21:25 2008. 120 feet = 40 yards. That's an impressive distance if you are a running back trying to get past Demarcus Ware and Tank Johnson and nobody's throwing blocks for you. Otherwise it's not a big deal. |
|
|
| (557721) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 14:40:36 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by RonInBayside on Tue Jan 22 14:38:32 2008. Yes, that's why they usually position the station markers near the busiest stairways, entrances/exits. For people just wondering on the platforms, they can put up "V trains don't stop pass this point" signs. No big deal. |
|
|
| (557738) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 15:24:53 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 22 13:47:48 2008. You made it sound like many Nassau bound riders transfer to uptown trains at Canal, Chambers and Fulton. Very few people would go down to Fulton, they change at Wyckoff or Essex.We were talking about the "south of Wyckoff" people. You even brought them up. Aside from some people reversing from Central or Knickerbocker, all the other stations are not going to "use Wyckoff". Then YOU yourself say all the "8th Ave and 7th Ave bound people" will use Essex. So then that's a three seat ride! The 6th Ave direct service then will help them....you say it yourself by saying "7th and 8th Ave people will use [Wyckoff] or Essex. We know they aren't using Wyckoff when they are south of Central....so all the people bound for the West Side are either using Essex (as you say) or Fulton, which is a terrible roundabout way to have to do it, but seeing they don't have the direct 6th Ave service, they have no choice..... (and I don't believe the West Side people aren't using Fulton, but that's what you said..... And obviously there are M riders south of Wyckoff bound for one of the West Side lines. So they are either going to Fulton (which is a PITA), or they are using Essex (and would benefit from the 6th Ave service. |
|
|
| (557739) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Eric B on Tue Jan 22 15:28:46 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Tue Jan 22 11:59:28 2008. My own version of the V/M combo was really for evenings and weekends because of the difficulty of accomodating the route on 6th Ave. weekdays. Sometimes; I try to come up with ideas on how to do that (such as using 72/2 middle when it opens), but this was in assuming that if people had the midtown service on off hours and saw the benefit it brings, they would then naturally begin demanding "why not on rush hours?" as well.If that were true, then your objection would be moot. However, if your objection is true, and people for some reaon would prefer lower Manhattan service (if for the sake of accustomedness if nothing else), then there should be no problem with my idea of running the midtown service evenings and weekends only. At THOSE times, midtown service would definitely be more desired than desolate downtown areas, and we currently have service to neither at those times now! It would be nice if a special survey was done on it. |
|
|
| (557742) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by Eric B on Tue Jan 22 15:39:36 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 09:49:04 2008. I too would much rather have the M out of the south, as it is always getting lost out there, and then skipping all the stops over here after we've waited for it, and all the J's and Z's go by on time.So yes, if an M/V vombo was done, then you could just restore the old TT service to Chambers, and make it primarily peak direction only (with perhaps a few going back through the tunnel for those going to downtown Brooklyn from Mahnattan, and then dropping out at 9th Ave.) I'm looking into a way to do this with the current through M service, but it's difficult, as if you turn trains back to Queens in the AM, yet still have the West End trains coming through, you would have double service on the reverse peak towards Queens. (And vice verse in the PM, which is the most important to me, as it would be nice to have at least some M's starting from Manhattan, in case of delays from Brooklyn). What they really need is more "central city" storage space for midday layups. For instance, Sunnyside would have been nice for the Bway and 6th Ave lines, as you could increase peak service from Brooklyn, and decrease it when it becomes the reverse peak service to Queens. The Nassau line does not have |
|
|
| (557749) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 16:03:22 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Eric B on Tue Jan 22 15:28:46 2008. My own version of the V/M combo was really for evenings and weekends because of the difficulty of accomodating the route on 6th Ave. weekdays.Why is it difficult? How is it any different than the V running on 6th Ave? Headways wouldn't be any different than the current V train operates. |
|
|
| (557775) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Eric B on Tue Jan 22 17:19:25 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 16:03:22 2008. With a combination, it is again the issue of having to restrict one of Jamaica's lines to 8 car 60 ft. only, and reduce capacity that may be filled in the future, and not be able to have the future V local/F express to Church, which is where it naturally should go.For my other idea of not combining it but making it a separate line to 72/2; it would be having the three lines on the local track. So my plans are better suited for weekends and perhaps evenings (and earlier in this thread I posted my new scheme where all of the trains could be run out of FP, ENY and even Canarsie if necessary, so you wouldn't have to have these foreign trainsets in Jamaica that could not be used on any other line there). So these other people are suggesting the M riders would not want to lose the direct Nassau service, and hence they would prefer it to a new midtown service. If that's true, then fine; as running midtown service would not take anything away from them at all, and they would not complain "why not rush hours?". |
|
|
| (557776) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Tue Jan 22 17:21:58 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 13:21:25 2008. I believe that the C train usually has about 8 60-foot subway cars, to the A trains full-length 10-car trains and their 75-foot equivalents. For example, watch the Broadway-Nassau station when C-trains pull in. The riders usually just walk to the nearest open door, or stand in places where there is an advantage for taking either train.Mike |
|
|
|
Page 12 of 20 |
||
