|
|
| Re: M-V combo (554375) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 13 of 20 |
||
|
| (557784) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 22 17:54:11 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 13:36:37 2008. If you want to turn the South Brooklyn M at Essex, it has to use the center track. Think about morning rush. The evening rush won't have this problem. |
|
|
| (557787) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 22 17:56:19 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 15:24:53 2008. You are misunderstanding something.You said that many users who currently use the Nassau portion transfer back uptown and they will ride the M/V instead. What I didn't understand is why you included the Fulton transfer. I said nobody uses the transfer at Fulton so there is no one who will shift from there. In other words, the Nassau traffic will not lessen because of those people, as they don't exist. There will be some shift for people currently transferring at Chambers but I think not that much. Bleecker is a local only stop and the transfer is not built yet. People who transfer at Canal to the N and Q will shift to the M/V if that's more convenient for them. But I still think the majority of Nassau bound people actually work near Canal, Chambers, Fulton and Broad. |
|
|
| (557795) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 18:23:21 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 22 17:56:19 2008. I said nobody uses the transfer at Fulton so there is no one who will shift from there.I don't believe that is the case. How do the people access the 7th Ave or 8th Ave lines if using the M? They aren't all using Wyckoff, as many of the M riders are south of Wyckoff. And if they are all using Essex, what a pain in the ass for a three seat ride. I do not believe your statement "Nobody uses the Fulton transfer", unless you can somehow back that up. Granted, the trains begin to empty by the time the M gets past Canal, but then you statement that all these people "want the Nassau line" also doesn't hold any water, as the trains are more than 3/4 empty by the time they hit Canal St. Then you said all these people "want the Nassau line". It can't be both. They certainly aren't all going to the least used station in all of Manhattan, Bowery. And all these people aren't going to "Chinatown" either, so they are transferring to another line at Canal St, meaning either the Bway line or the Lex Line there. And if they are transferring to the Bway line, they are roundaboutly going south just to go back north again. And as mentioned, the 6th Ave Line's Manhattan destinations are quite similar to the Bway line's destinations, and a one seat ride may just tip the tide for a lot of those people who now have a two seat ride and go all the way down to Canal just to go back north again. That takes care of Canal St. Then that leaves you Chambers. The local Lex riders will eventually use Broadway-Lafayette/Bleecker if a 6th Ave train is there, and I acknowledged that Chambers may still be attractive to some Lexington Express people. But then you have to remember that it takes time to go all the way from Essex down to Chambers, while they could have just gotten the Lex at Bway-Lafayette, which is only one station after Essex, and already be that further north, instead of having to come all the way up from Brooklyn Bridge after riding all the way down to Chambers St. That's takes time traveling down, just to go backtrack up again. Not to mention the 6's headways are excellent. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (557800) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Eric B on Tue Jan 22 18:31:47 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Michael549 on Tue Jan 22 17:21:58 2008. OK, let's look at this from another perspective.8 cars of less than 75 feet was the old BMT system. THe IND was a bit more progressive, with capacity for 10 60 ft cars, and it easily handled 75 ft cars when introduced. The BMT needed extensive modification for both new features. The South was completed, but not the East, as money ran out. So the East is basically stuck in the BMT past, and not as up to date as the rest of the B div. (It is almost as separate a division as the A div.) The C is like a distant cousin to the BMT East, as it was always a last place stepchild line, for most of its existence, just a rush hour service. When it was upgraded to a full fledged line, most of the people took to the A which was at the same time made express for more times. So the C, not needing the cpacity, is basically stuck in "IND local" past. (IT could always instantly take the longer cars and trains if neede. The G already has the longer cars, and is extended in GO.s). The V now, began as a "modern" IND line with full length trains of longer cars. It was created to give local riders direct 53rd St/6th Ave service, to hopefully keep local riders off the E and F. So to change that now to the old BMT and IND-local configuration is a reversion to the past. It would cost money to upgrade the entire BMT East, and there is perhaps not the ridership to extend the C and G, so those are simply examples of lines that were never converted to the present maximum. But they are not going to revert a modern line, just because of these other lines that were stuck in the past, so to speak. Especially, again, since they are hoping it draws more riders, and latest figures suggested it is. |
|
|
| (557802) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 18:35:31 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Eric B on Tue Jan 22 17:19:25 2008. 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.That is pure speculation though. Many of these people don't even know about the fact that it's even possible to have direct Midtown service. I lived in Ridgewood (near Forest Ave) for over 20 years, and I never knew that was there until I became a "SubFan". None of my neighbors had any clue. We all just got off at Wyckoff and took the L if we wanted Midtown, and accepted that as "that's the way it is". And I can tell you that 80% of my Manhattan subway travel was to Midtown. I usually used the L, but also did the Essex-Delancey thing, or occasionally Canal St. Rarely if ever did I actually need a destination along the Nassau line (exiting fare control), and all the Nassa transfers are a pain in the ass to go all the way south just to go north again on some other line after transferring....thus the popularity of the L. Most of the people I lived around that also used the subway, also had Midtown destinations. Unless you work down in the FInancial district, the Nassau line is all but useless, as even though it connects to every trunk line, it's still a PITA to use most of those transfers. I mean, you live or lived along the M too....how often did you rather have Nassau than Midtown access? How many times have YOU used the L because the Nassau line was useless to you. I mean Bushwick and Ridgewood are not exactly crawling with Wall St or Financial District types. |
|
|
| (557803) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 22 18:48:21 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 18:23:21 2008. I'd love to go for round trips between Essex and Broad(well, Fulton since you have to leave the system at Broad) during the Wall St. rush of 6:30 to 9:00 to prove either you or me wrong but I can't now. :( |
|
|
| (557805) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 18:49:50 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Eric B on Tue Jan 22 18:31:47 2008. The V now, began as a "modern" IND line with full length trains of longer cars. It was created to give local riders direct 53rd St/6th Ave service, to hopefully keep local riders off the E and F.Yes that is true. And it works well....but is far from full. So to change that now to the old BMT and IND-local configuration is a reversion to the past. No, it's not necessary to have full length trains on the V, and like the C that runs with the A (or the E for a while), it's not a big deal when a shorter C pulls in instead of an E. Because in "theory", this could be considered a "regretion" of service? because it's suggested that they take off two cars (thinking as 60 foot car trains) that are not needed? So that is why Eastern Division riders must suffer un-necessarily? I don't get that logic. It's not like we are asking to take 2 cars off the N train or the R train which uses it's full length trains more to capacity. |
|
|
| (557806) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Eric B on Tue Jan 22 18:52:24 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 18:35:31 2008. For the past year, I take the L almost always now, as I live slightly closer to Wyckoff, and coming from midtown, it's faster to just go to 14th, down the lfight of stairs from 6th Ave. or Bway, and then walk from Wyckoff. No having to wait for the F to Essex, and only the V comes, and then the hassle with the M getting lost on 4th Ave. or the J just missing one at Myrtle, and by the time the next one comes, the next J does catch up with that one! No hike up the narrow stairway at Canal either. The only thing is that I never get a seat on the L like I did on the M. All last pick, when accessing the 7th Ave line's uptown terminals; I even used the long passageway. Of course, these are the points you are making.Now, I only use the J to the M on Sundays when coming from CIYD, or when going to and coming from the ERA NY Div. meeting. in that case, being weekday, it is handy to not have to change to something else. I'm just used to it. Sometimes if I am in downtown Brooklyn, I'll get on the M at Lawrence, but usually; I take the F to Essex. That's faster. If I ever move up and get a job in NYCT headquarters, like I wish some day, I would stay on the M in the morning, and come back either way in the evening. Me; I'm all over the place, and there are times I would not want to lose the Nassau/Montague service, and other times; I prefer midtown service. Others, who are even more fixed to Nassau, may be against changing it. Some of course will prefer the midtown service. I can't speak for everyone else, so that's why I said it should be surveyed, and then weighed. But that's assuming they would even do it on weekdays, with the affect of the V it could cause. So to me, it is better for weekends. |
|
|
| (557808) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 18:57:54 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 22 17:54:11 2008. If you want to turn the South Brooklyn M at Essex, it has to use the center track. Think about morning rush. The evening rush won't have this problem.Okay, now I see what you are saying. But for that there is the J. They get off the M/V train, and the J pulls in behind it on the same track. Most people aren't riding through from let's say some station Marcy Ave or north of that and riding the M all the way through to let's say Bay Parkway. Very few if any people ride in on the WillyB only to ride through Nassau and out in Montague, so that is a non-issue. The only thing that will happen at Essex is a reverse of what happens now at Essex for people transferring to Delancey. Most of the transfers will be better served along 6th Ave, and for the few that actually use Bowery, Chinatown, or Wall St as destinations (and it's a small percentage of the train there's the J. |
|
|
| (557815) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Eric B on Tue Jan 22 19:09:18 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 18:49:50 2008. >It's not like we are asking to take 2 cars off the N train or the R train which uses it's full length trains more to capacity.To them, it IS like asking that. It is the busiest corridor, they are hoping ridership will increase, and it in fact does seem like it is, however slowly. Taking cars off such a line is a "reversion". It is going backwards, where the lines already like that apparently had no need to move forwards. Plus, Jamaica would now need this dedicated fleet for one line, which it does not now have. It is NOT just a matter of "taking two cars off". It is making things more complicated on several levels. I want to see us get better service (Since I AM still over here), but I have come to learn a bit how the operations planners think; and I just don't see them doing this. It goes against their objective, which is better Queens corridor service, first. So they will just shoot it down (and us get nothing), unless there was suddenly a mass demand that outwieghed Queens corridor needs. Of course, there cannot be such a demand when the people do not even know about it. (and people over heard have never really been big on making their voices heard like others are). So if something was done, it would have to start out small, and then let demand increase. They have absolutely no reason to do this, now. And anyway; I think the V would be more naturally fitting, and useful as the local in Brooklyn to allow express service, and it seems the operations planners are finally starting to yield to this demand, though it will be delayed by the construction. |
|
|
| (557826) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 22 19:21:53 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 18:57:54 2008. and for the few that actually use Bowery, Chinatown, or Wall St as destinations (and it's a small percentage of the train there's the J.Now it's down to a few or a small percentage? I must be Osmosis Jones. :D I will shut up on this matter until we get figures from NYCT or I see it again myself (which I can't now). |
|
|
| (557858) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 21:00:35 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Eric B on Tue Jan 22 18:52:24 2008. Sometimes if I am in downtown Brooklyn, I'll get on the M at Lawrence, but usually; I take the F to Essex. That's faster.Haha, I did that for two years! I went to school on Jay St for two years, and that's the two years I was ready to kill whoever thought it was a good idea to tear down the Myrtle El! Originally, I would take the M from Forest Ave all the way to Lawrence St. But I was absolutely miserable. the trek down Nassau and through that hell tunnel was enough to make me crazy. After week of that, I tried the B54 bus connection, and that was a hell bus ride, so that lasted all of a day. Then I tried getting off at Essex, and took the F to Jay St, and kinda liked that. I also tried the M to the J to Bway Junction for the A to Jay St as I always found it ridiculous to go all the way into Manhattann just to go back to Brooklyn again....but after a month of the trial and error, I did the Essex-Delancey to the F thing for the remainer of the two years while I went there.... And you are right, it is faster with the M and F in a two seat ride than the hellish trek down Nassau and through Montague with the M in one seat ride to Lawrence! Then I tranfered to Baruch, and became a daily M to the L rider (there's that midtown again.....) for a few years. As for me, my travel habits changed from year to year depending on school I was attending, jobs, etc. I rarely used Nassau more than occasionally. If I wanted to go to Chinatown for something, or to the WTC ever so occasionally I would get off at Broad St, but it was very rare that I would venture south of Essex, or Canal St. For one semester I had a class over by the Clark St 2/3 station in brooklyn, and once a week I took the 2/3 to Fulton St, but that was only once a week for one semester, and thankfully back then the M still ran through all day, but nowadays the M ends at Chambers, so it would have made much of a difference whether I changed from the J to the M at Chambers, Essex, or even Myrtle-Bway, so I truly don't see many people missing the M on Nassay, as more than half the time it doesn't even go past Chambers anyway, and anyone coming south of there has to use the J anyway. |
|
|
| (557878) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Eric B on Tue Jan 22 21:57:52 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 21:00:35 2008. I use the L to the A transfter alot also. Like on the way to the Sunday job (I don't bother coming back that way, when I'm already on the F, and do not have the rush to be on time like going to work). It is faster, and I go downstairs at Wyckoff, instead of running the other way to go upstairs at Seneca.Also forgot to mention, we are looking to move now (just got off Craig's list), and most likely further in, like Fresh Pond. Then, I would be dependant on the M again, though with the new transfer at Wyckoff, it is a little better to change there. Still do hope they add the later evening service, and eventually the weekend service! It was that news that made me more open to staying in the area (in which it is nicer the frther from the L you are). |
|
|
| (557897) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 22:59:47 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Eric B on Tue Jan 22 19:09:18 2008. Plus, Jamaica would now need this dedicated fleet for one line, which it does not now have. It is NOT just a matter of "taking two cars off". It is making things more complicated on several levels.So the M/V could run out of East New York, using East New York's equipment, after all, the V will be an Eastern Division train if it runs there. unless there was suddenly a mass demand that outwieghed Queens corridor needs. But as mentioned, the problem is that 99% of the people living along the M line, or the J line have absolutely NO idea that service is even possible, so none of them will "demand" something they don't know exists. |
|
|
| (557901) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 23:08:57 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Eric B on Tue Jan 22 21:57:52 2008. The area around Fresh Pond Rd is really nice. As you said, the further you get from the L, the nicer Ridgewood is, progressively, block by block.But improvement seems to be sweeping towards Bushwick from Ridgewood, and also from WIlliamsburg in Bushwick. Ridgewood was never bad like Bushwick was, but there was a point in the early 90's where it looked like it could go either way, but it's been getting nicer and nicer ever since. There's a lot of Polish moving into Ridgewood now, and all kinds of Polish businesses opening up all along Forest Ave and Fresh Pond Rd, and they seem to really be fixing the buildings up when they buy them. It's a lot nicer there now than when I moved out in the mid 90s. |
|
|
| (557907) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Tue Jan 22 23:48:31 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 22:59:47 2008. But as mentioned, the problem is that 99% of the people living along the M line, or the J line have absolutely NO idea that service is even possible, so none of them will "demand" something they don't know exists. Spread the good word, my children. :) Seriously. Y'all who live in that area should start a campaign to draw attention to the connection that could improve the subway ride considerably just laying fallow. Write to the Ridgewood Times, the News, the Post. Even the Times might be interested since there are growing numbers of "their demographic" heading out that way. Hit the local TV news as well. Write to your local city council rep as well. If NYCT is presented with the legitimate points from this discussion, along with popular support, and some media, they're more likely to give the routing serious consideration. They also might be more amenable to implementing it to deflect flak from the G cutback, especially if the media were to hit them with something like "Tunnel that could improve service deliberately kept under wraps for 30 years." Just imagine the surprise 30 years from now when some intrepid future SubChatters learn there has been a connection between Court Square and the Queens Blvd line all along! :-P |
|
|
| (557913) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 23:55:09 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Tue Jan 22 23:48:31 2008. Just imagine the surprise 30 years from now when some intrepid future SubChatters learn there has been a connection between Court Square and the Queens Blvd line all along! :-PHahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! I love it!! It's so true though!! |
|
|
| (557943) | |
Re: Chrystie Street connection from Williamsburg Bridge |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 23 01:42:23 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Tue Jan 22 23:48:31 2008. That is true:Only those of use who have seen the maps and know that the connection is there are wise enough to even think of that. |
|
|
| (557945) | |
Re: M/V Merger and creating a Bay Parkway Loop |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 23 01:52:04 2008, in response to 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. There is another way I had mentioned previously about placating those who would lose the M line in Brooklyn:A lot of people forget or don't know that the tracks to what used to be the Nassau Street Loop for the most part still exist. In that regard, what could be done is rebuild the connection from to the Brooklyn bound track of the Manhattan Bridge ONLY, which would allow for a Bay Parkway Loop Line that can operate during rush hours, starting AND finishing at Bay Parkway. This also would allow for an emergency route when needed as well. The loop train would run to Manhattan via the Montauge Street tunnel (stopping at Lawrence and Court Street to Manhattan ONLY), then make the three stops on the fomer Nassau Street Loop at Broad, Fulton and Chambers Street before heading back to Brooklyn via the Manhattan Bridge that would likely placate many of those who use the M on the 4th Avenue Brooklyn line during rush hours. |
|
|
| (557951) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Wed Jan 23 02:25:11 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Tue Jan 22 23:48:31 2008. THIS is a public forum...and WE KNOW the MTA READS this board daily..So They KNOW all about the Broadway Brooklyn-6th Avenue discussion...and desire for the service.. |
|
|
| (557953) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Wed Jan 23 02:41:04 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Edwards! on Wed Jan 23 02:25:11 2008. Whether they read it here or not is irrelevant. They won't do anything unless they get a loud and clear message from the riding public. Leaving it to others to take action won't get you any further than Court Square. |
|
|
| (557957) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Wed Jan 23 03:02:36 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Wed Jan 23 02:41:04 2008. Oh..Outside of this board..my neighborhood group has a most active "relationship with the TA" involving the G line.Fact of the matter...we have fought the TA tooth and nail about the cuts to service..cut in rolling stock..and other matters. The problem is..are THEY willing to listen? Most cases..Yes.. Some..they won't budge on.. We are currently back and forth with them concerning the cuts... As always..they "will get back to you.." |
|
|
| (557958) | |
Re: M/V Merger and creating a Bay Parkway Loop |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Wed Jan 23 03:04:21 2008, in response to Re: M/V Merger and creating a Bay Parkway Loop, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 23 01:52:04 2008. It has been suggested..using the Airtrain. |
|
|
| (557962) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 23 03:57:31 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 22 07:26:41 2008. They can have both. The 125st St Line (the T) can go down Nassau St(and on to Brooklyn). A future Bronx Line from the 125/2 Av stub/miniyard can go down Water St plus you can add a Queens Line off the 63rd St tunnel to Water St too. Nothing has been shot down yet. The Water St Line is Phase IV. They just broke ground on Phase I. |
|
|
| (557965) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 23 04:25:02 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 08:30:46 2008. My guess is that it would get a majority of the riders that now only have the (J/Z) at Bway Jct plus all those on the local stops to Myrtle Av. A big chunk of (M) customers would immediately transfer to it there too to beat the crowds boarding the (V) between Myrtle and Marcy (who would still have the M). It would be a one-seat ride for a lot of folks. A faster (J/Z) commute would also get people off the (E) in Jamaica. A M/V merge would still be better then what we have now though. |
|
|
| (557966) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 23 04:57:54 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 22 11:52:54 2008. Because of the one seat ride to where they work.I agree with everything that Chris wrote so far and the reason is simple. The subway is supposed to bring the greatest benefit to the largest amount of people. I don't think that people living in areas served exclusively by the (J/M/Z) are anymore likely to work Downtown then people living elsewhere. An M-V combo would grant many of these people a one-seat ride to Midtown rather then Downtown. For those still heading to the Financial District, an easy cross-platform transfer to the (J/Z) isn't much of a sacrifice when compared to the system-wide benefits of such a merge, mainly the relief of the (L) train. That said, I would prefer that the (V) continue to Bway Jct and the (M) remain as is. That way people along stations between Myrtle and Marcy get two choices (the M AND the V) and people at local stations between Bway Jct and Myrtle will have a Midtown service while (J/Z) riders can go express between Bway Jct and Myrtle. |
|
|
| (557967) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 23 05:03:52 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by Eric B on Tue Jan 22 15:39:36 2008. Another reason for a SAS connection to Nassau/Montague. |
|
|
| (557968) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 23 05:30:49 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Eric B on Tue Jan 22 18:31:47 2008. Then flip everything on W4. Send the (C) to Bway Bklyn and the (E) to CI. The (F) to WTC and the (V) to Euclid. If necessary flip the (E/F) northern terminals. |
|
|
| (557969) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 23 05:32:49 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 22:59:47 2008. The only good thing that would have came out of a short Amtrak strike would have been people's discovery of the Christie Cut. They would never forget it and demand it permanently. |
|
|
| (557970) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 23 05:37:16 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Edwards! on Wed Jan 23 02:25:11 2008. Agreed. Most importantly, the discussion is rather fairly informed, rational and not "foamer" based and the differences are minor. For some reason discussions about the M/V deter flame wars too. |
|
|
| (557976) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 23 06:27:19 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 23 05:37:16 2008. I would suspect because most of us realize such a line would be very useful in combining one line (M) that except for a short stretch basically duplicates another (J) most of the way with another line (V) that is not the most popular in the system and would only lose one stop (its current terminal at 2nd Avenue) in a combined line, with such a combined line playing a big role in taking pressure off what is widely considered the most overcrowded line in the system (the L) while at the same time taking two lines that only operate into Manhattan on weekdays, and via combining them making the single line at least 19/7 if not 24/7.For those who would lament losing the M in South Brooklyn during rush hours, one way that can be remedied is to rebuild one connection of the former Nassau Street Loop to the Manhattan Bridge heading to Brooklyn ONLY, allowing for a Bay Parkway loop train that would start and finish there, going to Manhattan via the tunnel and from Manhattan via the Bridge after making the Nassau Street Line stops (only on the northbound track). |
|
|
| (557978) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 23 06:34:46 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 23 05:30:49 2008. Actually:Having the E and F switch southern terminals may not be a bad idea once the Q is extended to 96th/2nd. Many of those riders would have to switch somewhere along the line if they are going to the financial district anyway (until either the Water Street Branch of the SAS is ready OR the SAS is connected to the Nassau Street Line), so an across-the-platform transfer at 63rd/Lex might be the way to best handle that. |
|
|
| (557982) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 23 07:11:14 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 22 18:48:21 2008. What is forgotten is that M riders who want lower Manahattan with an M-V setup can make a same platform transfer to the J train anywhere between Myrtle and Essex Street that both trains stop at.As for riders who use the M from South Brooklyn during rush hours, if you rebuild the connection from old the Nassau Street Loop to the Manhattan Bridge going to Brooklyn, you can then have a new Bay Parkway Loop train start and finish there with such a line going to Manhattan via the Montauge Street tunnel, stopping going northbound only in Manhattan at Broad, Fulton and Chambers and then going back to Brooklyn via the Bridge. That would placate many of those riders. |
|
|
| (557983) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 23 07:17:42 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 23 05:03:52 2008. Exactly:The SAS connection to the Nassau/Montauge line would be a big help here aside from the fact it would allow the SAS to access lower Manhattan much faster than waiting for the Water Street segment to be built. |
|
|
| (557986) | |
Future phases of SAS |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 23 07:24:21 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 23 03:57:31 2008. Exactly:A lot can change between now and the time it is to actually build the lower Manhattan portion of the SAS, which won't be for probably another 10-12 years at least. By that time, it's very possible people will see the light into having a connection to the Nassau Street line from the SAS, especially since by then people will likely realize such a connection would be very useful to relieve pressure from the 4/5 in lower Manhattan as well as give an alternate route to Brooklyn should any of the Broadway lines need to be re-routed via 2nd Avenue once the line to Houston is complete for example. |
|
|
| (557987) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 23 07:29:27 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 23 04:25:02 2008. That is true on a faster J/Z getting people off the E in Jamaica:Perhaps during rush hours, the M would run it's current route, while the V starts at Broadway Junction, while at all other times, the V starts at Metropolitan and runs to 71st-Continental (except perhaps overnights, when it would run from Metropolitan-West 4th if not 24/7 to 71st-Continental, which still a major transfer point to the other major lines on 6th and 8th avenue). The M/V combo, or any other 6th avenue service on the Broadway Brooklyn line would help a lot. |
|
|
| (558006) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 23 08:31:06 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 23 04:57:54 2008. I don't think that people living in areas served exclusively by the (J/M/Z) are anymore likely to work Downtown then people living elsewhere.Personally, I feel almost less likely! Ridgewood, Bushwick, Cypress Hills, East New York, etc are not exactly booling with "Wall Street" and "Financial Center" types. They are mostly basically working class blue collar neighborhoods. |
|
|
| (558030) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Wed Jan 23 10:51:21 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 23 08:31:06 2008. FWIW, there are about 13,000 blue collar jobs below Chambers St. Not much, maybe. But still some numbers. There were likely more when the WTC was still standing.While checking a few numbers, I noticed that Ridgewood's median income is about $40K, almost double of that in Bushwick. Is there a wealthier area in Ridgewood that raises that number? Middle Village at $54K is even higher but I hear people mostly drive. |
|
|
| (558048) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Eric B on Wed Jan 23 11:57:03 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 22:59:47 2008. >So the M/V could run out of East New York, using East New York's equipment, after all, the V will be an Eastern Division train if it runs there.It would be harder to do that on weekdays. I devised that on weekends because it would take 3 hours for the first train from Met to go all the way to Forest Hills and return, and this came in handy, as you would not beed the through service coming from Manhattan so early in the morning. So the trains can come from ENY, go in to service at Myrtle to prove the shuttle service towards Met, and then head off to Manhattan from Met. and it would keep doing that until the first round trip trains returnm adnd it would be later int he morning by then. On weekdays, you have the two way service from both Met and CIYD. So the Met. bound service doesn't have to wait for the first round trip from Met. to return. That yard is big and varied enough for the M to have space for its dedicated fleet. Jamaica isn't. >But as mentioned, the problem is that 99% of the people living along the M line, or the J line have absolutely NO idea that service is even possible, so none of them will "demand" something they don't know exists. Which is why Operations Planning has no motivation to go affecting weekday Queens Blvd. service and Jamaica yard, and our requests for that much will quickly be thrown out. It is better to start on something less disruptive like weekends (when the V doesn't run at all, so it would be an improvement, rather than a reduction; —as well as benefitting the G riders going to local stations, which is the long forgotten original topic of this thread). As one of the other people said, the Amtrak strike would have been a lucky break of sorts for exposure of the service. Or some other emergency. Unless that stuff happens, the only way to convince them to use it now is in a way that does not affect any other established line. They are not going to diminish established lines for something basically untried (or when it was tried years ago, it flopped, and the infrastructure [northern terminal] has changed since then). |
|
|
| (558049) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Eric B on Wed Jan 23 11:59:49 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 23 06:27:19 2008. I don't see why that would be necessary. It could just go to Chambers like the old TT. They will be less likely to take the idea if they have to spend money on construction. (even small construction like the track bed, rails, electrical, signal, etc). |
|
|
| (558061) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 23 12:37:10 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by Wado MP73 on Wed Jan 23 10:51:21 2008. FWIW, there are about 13,000 blue collar jobs below Chambers St. Not much, maybe. But still some numbers. There were likely more when the WTC was still standing.That's all well and great, but I don't see how there are a disproportionate amount of people that work in the Financial District along the M or J lines than work in the Financial district than any other lines. While checking a few numbers, I noticed that Ridgewood's median income is about $40K, almost double of that in Bushwick. Is there a wealthier area in Ridgewood that raises that number? No, Ridgewood is a completely different neighborhood than Bushwick. At their border they somewhat blend a little, but It's certainly no surprise at all that Ridgewood's income would be double that of Bushwick. Are you sure you know these areas? |
|
|
| (558071) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Wed Jan 23 13:15:01 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 22 23:08:57 2008. I haven't been to Ridgewood since the late 1970s. An aunt lived in Harman Street between Irving and Wyckoff. When she moved out in 1978, the neighborhood had become pretty run-down and was filling fast with rather unsavory sorts. One avoided going beyond Knickerbocker or Menahan: Wilson Av was the point of no return where "there be dragons here!" The post-blackout "Bushwick Blight" had quickly deteriorated the shopping areas along Myrtle and Knickerbocker.Goodness...this just got me thinking about a wonderful old-style bakery that was on Wyckoff...somewhere between Harman and DeKalb. It was on a corner, and it had one of those black and white checkerboard linoleum floors. There were always a bunch of old world German ladies my aunt would gab away with in German. The baking aromas were the best high imaginable. |
|
|
| (558129) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 23 16:53:10 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Eric B on Wed Jan 23 11:59:49 2008. True, however:Such a connection to the Manhattan Bridge, even if only to the Brooklyn-bound track would have the additional benefit of being able to send trains that way in an emergency. The revival of the TT would also be a good idea. |
|
|
| (558134) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 23 16:56:16 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Eric B on Wed Jan 23 11:57:03 2008. It didn't actually flop:The old KK was dropped because of budgetary concerns when New York was bankrupt 30+ years ago (not because of lack of ridership), and never went to Queens in the first place. This combined line would be new from 47-50 to 71st-Continental. |
|
|
| (558157) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Wed Jan 23 17:28:34 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 23 03:57:31 2008. They can have both.And how do you propose to pay for redundant connections when the need has not been established? |
|
|
| (558158) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 23 17:29:48 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Wed Jan 23 13:15:01 2008. Knickerbocker Ave deteriorated by the late 70's, but only Myrtle from around Wyckoff, and then under the el went bad. The rest of Myrtle has remained relatively healthy. Vacant stores rarely stay empty long. The block of Myrtle between Cypress and St Nicholas was always a little seedy, and then of course as you go under the el, but the further you get from Wyckoff on Myrtle, the better it gets.Ridgewood now has a strong influx of Polish people over the last few years, and it's really shaping up, especially the further you get away from the L train. Bushwick too is having it's own rebirth. While it's still marginal comparing it to Ridgewood, it's come a LONG way over the last 5-10 years, and it's night and day from the mid 80s when it hit rock bottom. With Ridgewood's maintained strenght pushing in from the north, and with the gentrification of Williamsburg pushing in on the other side, as well as Bed-Stuy's own gentrification, Bushwick's future looks brighter than it has in dacades. |
|
|
| (558188) | |
Re: M-V combo |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Wed Jan 23 18:36:55 2008, in response to Re: M-V combo, posted by Russ on Wed Jan 23 17:28:34 2008. Besides, the Nassau connection was found to be too expensive. It doesn't end by simply connecting the tunnels. Platforms have to be lengthened, Canal and Chambers have to be re-configured, etc... |
|
|
| (558195) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Wed Jan 23 18:47:08 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 23 17:29:48 2008. This branch of the thread answers my last question in another branch. Thanks. |
|
|
| (558204) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Wed Jan 23 19:25:13 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 23 17:29:48 2008. My question is...Why did it take "gentrification" to make these neighborhoods "better"? To me..that is an insult..to the 10th degree. For years ..these neighborhoods got "Blacklisted" by bankers..developers..fostering BLIGHT upon BLIGHT..removing VITAL LINKS in transportation..super markets going under...building and homes allowed to ROT...with NO BAILOUTS in sight...PROPERTY VALUES PURPOSELY DRIVEN DOWN... Now..with MANHATTAN out of reach of most of the "yuppies hipsters"..Urban Pioneers venture into the "Ghetto"..buy property..[How did they do this is the bank holds the property and keeps it off the market...?]Live there for awhile..then sell it, driving up the cost of ownership. Now some property owner wont even sell or rent to "neighborhood folks"..only to the up and coming "Venture Brothers".. This out and out SUCKS ASS ROYALLY! |
|
|
| (558225) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 23 20:57:55 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Edwards! on Wed Jan 23 19:25:13 2008. That's one of the problems that now forms. Now that Bushwick's crime rate has gone down, and it's housing stock slowly improving, it makes it very difficult for the people that stuck it out through the hell years to be able to afford to stay.So improvement comes with many good things, but it also comes with bad. It's a double edged sword because while it was hell when it was full of abandoned buildings, burnt out shells, and rubble strewn lots, and drug dealers inhabiting them, while those are all but a thing of the past, the improvement brings it's own set of problems to those that stuck it out....or especially people that rent. While those that owned their homes also get to prosper from the new found prosperity in the form of higher property values. Those higher prices also begin to price out all those that rented all these years there when the neighborhood was hell. |
|
|
|
Page 13 of 20 |
||
