|
|
| Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (597772) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 3 of 8 |
||
|
| (599850) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 12 14:50:33 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Forest Glen on Thu Apr 10 17:24:55 2008. No, they will use it, but then just get off at the express stops to take the F. The way Fulton line riders takes the C only to get off at the express stops to take the A. |
|
|
| (599851) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 12 14:53:48 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by straphanger9 on Thu Apr 10 14:53:27 2008. You should probably extend the V over the R to 179th. Due to the V being a short line and the other being it goes thru 53rd St so riders wanting that corridor and not minding an all local ride would have another choice over just 63rd.Then again I'm not sure the folks on say 169th or the other local stops would be happy that they lose their one seat express ride to Manhattan... |
|
|
| (599852) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 12 14:56:25 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by R30A on Sat Apr 12 01:17:39 2008. Funny how he hates R32's yet doesn't want the E to be a local. I thought he takes the F just to avoid R32's? Oh that's right only the E goes to his precious stop at 53rd-Lex... |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (599853) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 12 14:58:18 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by trainsarefun on Sat Apr 12 11:04:29 2008. Either way, to expect only the R to run local on weekends w/out a suppliment line would not make any sense. Another line has to run and obviously it should be the V or perhaps as [i forget who] says they should extend the Q to Queens. |
|
|
| (599854) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by Forest Glen on Sat Apr 12 14:59:08 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 12 14:56:25 2008. Every time I've taken the F in the morning I've gotten to class late. I have to sacrifice the comfort of the R46 to board a stuffed E train. |
|
|
| (599856) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 12 15:02:27 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by The Port of Authority on Sat Apr 12 02:44:13 2008. Exactly. 4 lines going to Manhattan plus splitting the express lines now allows more express trains to run compared to b4 the changes. I say it has been a pretty fair compromise. especially how 53rd usually ends up having more congestion than 63rd, which the F can now avoid and run more smoothly. Finally when 53rd [usually] is shut down, the F runs w/out interruptions and the V can always be suspended while the E would have to make a detour up 6th Av. |
|
|
| (599857) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 12 15:03:55 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by LuchAAA on Sat Apr 12 02:11:21 2008. Exactly, thru 63rd the F passes by much more smoothly than it did going thru 53rd. |
|
|
| (599858) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 12 15:09:08 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by Forest Glen on Sat Apr 12 14:59:08 2008. Well have you tried leaving maybe 10-15min earlier? And where exactly are you going the UWS or UES?And I don't exactly recommend it but perhaps maybe you could take the F to 47-50th to take an uptown B/D [if going to UWS] if you find the E that bad. |
|
|
| (599864) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Sat Apr 12 15:33:19 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by Forest Glen on Sat Apr 12 01:57:48 2008. The V train didn't fuck up the Queens Blvd line and the F doesn't "meander" through the 63rd St tunnel. Having only one QB local on weekends (the R) is just not sufficient. Another train needs to run there to supplement the R. |
|
|
| (599865) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Sat Apr 12 15:38:06 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by Forest Glen on Sat Apr 12 01:35:57 2008. "During weekdays you have a useless V local in addition to the R train while the F runs through the stupid 63rd connector and the V is bursting at the seams."What???? How can a train be useless if it's bursting at the seems? Wouldn't the V train bursting at the seems contradict the idea that the V train is bursting at the seems? Also how did local riders screw up the F? It still runs express. And since it was rerouted to the 63rd St tunnel, it runs express 24/7. The only way local riders could screw it up is if they pile onto the F at Roosevelt Ave. |
|
|
| (599869) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (correction) |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Sat Apr 12 15:54:14 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Sat Apr 12 15:38:06 2008. Ummmm, sorry, that should be:"How can a train be useless if it's bursting at the seems? Wouldn't the V train bursting at the seems contradict the idea that the V train is useless?" |
|
|
| (599874) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (correction) |
|
|
Posted by jsun21 on Sat Apr 12 16:04:40 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (correction), posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Sat Apr 12 15:54:14 2008. Yes, however in a post later in the thread he cirrected it to read: "The E is bursting..." |
|
|
| (599876) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Sat Apr 12 16:19:50 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Sat Apr 12 15:38:06 2008. You don't understand the situation.Everyone in New York makes the exact commute leonard does. |
|
|
| (599881) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 12 16:39:05 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by error46146 on Thu Apr 10 16:33:13 2008. Oh stop being a selfish rfw foamer:The F can't be local because as you said it is local in the other boroughs and would make the F too long. The E is a short enough line that adding a few stops on it won't totally mess up the E's headways. Besides you keep saying how you hate having only one local on weekends so which is it? No additional local service so you have your 'precious' R32 E's as express or another line to run to help the R on weekends? You can't have it both ways. |
|
|
| (599882) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 12 16:44:46 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Michael549 on Sat Apr 12 03:01:43 2008. But point still stands that there should be a service improvement for the majority of riders and wouldn't the local have the majority over the express in the case of the QB lines? |
|
|
| (599883) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 12 16:49:32 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by KLCS on Sat Apr 12 01:40:56 2008. I agree, if they were to add maybe 3-5 extra R trains, they wouldn't have to run them into Brooklyn, just up to Whitehall so they can turn back to run only as Queens Blvd local suppliments. |
|
|
| (599889) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by Forest Glen on Sat Apr 12 17:21:24 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by The Port of Authority on Sat Apr 12 02:44:13 2008. The only silver lining is that I live a block away from a LIRR station. Sometimes it's worth it to spend more for a exponentially better commute. |
|
|
| (599933) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Sat Apr 12 20:22:42 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Apr 12 10:46:36 2008. I would do the same with the IND Fulton Line and build a cut from the BMT Court St station to the outer tracks at Hoyt-Schermerhorn. The (W) would be the local from Ditmars to Euclid. The (C) would be the Lefferts Express while the (A) would serve Rock Park 24/7 with extra trains for Far Rock as well. |
|
|
| (599934) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Sat Apr 12 20:25:42 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 12 14:58:18 2008. If they were to run the (V) weekends, then a V-M merge should seriously be looked at. I know that Wallyhorse would agree. |
|
|
| (599937) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 12 20:27:31 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by SMAZ on Sat Apr 12 20:22:42 2008. Sounds interesting and would save on costs of having to build a new East River tunnel. You should send that idea to the MTA. |
|
|
| (599940) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by KLCS on Sat Apr 12 20:33:34 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by Forest Glen on Sat Apr 12 10:57:41 2008. Many people take buses to local stops (Q38, 29, 11 (big one), 38, 53, 88, 58, 59, etc.) |
|
|
| (599950) | |
R Train Improvements Instead |
|
|
Posted by KLCS on Sat Apr 12 20:45:28 2008, in response to G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by KLCS on Wed Apr 9 00:24:08 2008. My proposal to mitigate the ending of G service in Queens with supplementing local service with the E apparantly has a lot of ooponents.So I guess the best course of action is improving R frequencies. With the 24/7 service and maybe 6-8 minute headways throughout the weekend days with some trains ending at Whitehall (although Brooklyn headways might become too long); this might be the best way to serve the Blvd's local ridership. At night the E will run local to supplement service. And I say again to imrpove mobility for the disabled and elderly, and ADA 23rd Street-Ely/Court Square. It's been a good discussion. |
|
|
| (599956) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Sat Apr 12 20:58:27 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 12 20:27:31 2008. Sounds interesting and would save on costs of having to build a new East River tunnel. You should send that idea to the MTAI think I will. It's an idea that worked for the QB Line in the 50's and for the Southern Division in the 60's with the Christie Cuts. The (W) would also get access to Pitkin Yards. If they connected the SAS to the Nassau Line you could run the (T) instead although I think that the Fulton Local riders would prefer the (W). |
|
|
| (599966) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 12 21:32:52 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by SMAZ on Sat Apr 12 20:25:42 2008. lol, let's hope there isn't another V-M mini thread again. You guys made like 3-4 too many of them. |
|
|
| (599974) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Aq Arcticson on Sat Apr 12 22:07:42 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by trainsarefun on Sat Apr 12 10:58:11 2008. Lol, the G train shows up some weekends and others not at all...it's all a game of chance with that train... |
|
|
| (599982) | |
Re: R Train Improvements Instead (Was G Train Hearing at City Hall) |
|
|
Posted by KLCS on Sat Apr 12 22:25:55 2008, in response to R Train Improvements Instead, posted by KLCS on Sat Apr 12 20:45:28 2008. I'm thinking of an R Saturday schedule: It would be something similar to this:In the morning (7-10AM), there is a sort of a 'peak' period when people go to work and early shoppers head to Manhattan. Trains would run every 5-6 minutes, with every other train ending at Whitehall St. Then ridership tapers for a bit during the midday and trains should run the full route every 8 minutes. Around (2-6PM), there is a PM 'peak' period with shoppers heading home and poeple heading into the city to hang out, etc. The 5-6 minute schedule will resume with every other train terminating at Whitehall St. After 6, trains would run every 8 minutes until 8-9PM and then drop offf after that. Things would be different on Sundays of course. But this shows, if actually implemented as scheduled, with no GO's or supplemental schedules, this could be enough local service for Queens Blvd. AND enough service for riders headed to Broadway in Manhattan AND for Broadway riders also. And it will probabaly happen that there will be R32's with Whitehall Street, South Ferry and 95 Street, Brooklyn signs mixed up. =) Kyle |
|
|
| (599990) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Forest Glen on Sat Apr 12 22:50:42 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by SMAZ on Sat Apr 12 20:22:42 2008. Fulton doesn't have the capacity for this service. |
|
|
| (599994) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 12 22:58:08 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Forest Glen on Sat Apr 12 22:50:42 2008. What are you talking about? Fulton local is more or less a feeder line to the A express. Fulton local can handle another line so long as it doesn't go thru the Cranberry tunnel. |
|
|
| (600007) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Sat Apr 12 23:18:38 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 12 22:58:08 2008. Can Montague handle three lines (although one of them does not deserve to run on it)? |
|
|
| (600018) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Sat Apr 12 23:31:07 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 12 14:50:33 2008. Not true at all, only at Utica Avenue when trains are scheduled to meet. |
|
|
| (600021) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Sat Apr 12 23:35:47 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Sat Apr 12 15:38:06 2008. The (V) is not bursting at its seems, while the line that it took some of its cars from, the (G) is. |
|
|
| (600023) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by jsun21 on Sat Apr 12 23:37:12 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by SMAZ on Sat Apr 12 20:22:42 2008. I don't agree with the A to Rock Park as the primary, the Rock Park branch is home to some of the loneliest stations in the MTA, some as low as 250 people a day on a weekday, thats barely on shuttle and in my opinion not worth sending an A train that way for nothing other than terminal capacity and appeasement of the Rockaway riders. That being said if the A is only split in two directions the amount of service may be enough to eliminate the shuttle and be a viable option for those who would opt to drive or take the LIRR as they won't have to wait for the shuttle and then wait for a transfer.A lot of people continue on 8th avenue from Fulton st, if the W is the only local I don't see it as a viable substitute for the C, perhaps have the C go local as for as B-way Junction. I know thats not popular because B-way is always straight-railed but it gives Lefferts riders some sort of fast service and it keeps the train count high going local. Between the hours of 3-7:30 the first five cars after Franklin Ave are usually crush loaded, usually because people off the shuttle are allowed to pool and as usual they are going to the junction so everyone stays up front. After B-way I don't think that many people care what the C does, it may even get people on the W and free up space on the C. However this only works if the W and C work in tandem as the W's current headways are woefully insufficient for the needs of during the rush. To be honest thats the one thing I felt bad about the C was that for a line designed to feed an express every 3-6 minutes was that with the train every 10 minutes you may end up dumping a train load of people onto 1 express, or in the other case a few A trains leave their local riders for just one train and it packs up like that. It would be nice to see Court St with a new purpose with the line you propose, I don't think you'll win over rail fans with the idea but such is life. If you are going to use the outer platforms of Hoyt Street I think you'll need platform conductors other wise you force local riders to gamble on which train will come first. Although the prospect of using the outer platforms as a Barcelona Solution for the C can alleviate crowding that occurs in...you guessed it...the first five cars. I'm not sure what time this W-Euclid service is supposed to run but perhaps consider sending it somewhere other than Astoria to help out other places like QB, or Second Ave...if and when. |
|
|
| (600024) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by Forest Glen on Sat Apr 12 23:40:32 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by Osmosis Jones on Sat Apr 12 23:35:47 2008. For the last time it was a typo. I was half asleep when I made that post. |
|
|
| (600030) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Sat Apr 12 23:43:51 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by Forest Glen on Sat Apr 12 23:40:32 2008. I know that, you said it already... |
|
|
| (600135) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Apr 13 03:39:16 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by Forest Glen on Sat Apr 12 00:47:21 2008. too f'ing bad. move somewhere else if you can't handle it. you know NOTHING about transit planning and you are always proposing the WORST ideas. you seem to only think about how you can serve yourself and not how NYCT can better serve the MAJORITY. |
|
|
| (600136) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Apr 13 03:39:54 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by R30A on Sat Apr 12 01:17:39 2008. IAWTP |
|
|
| (600137) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Apr 13 03:41:30 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by Forest Glen on Sat Apr 12 01:57:48 2008. haha, you got PWN3D!!!!! |
|
|
| (600138) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Apr 13 03:43:33 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by Forest Glen on Sat Apr 12 17:21:24 2008. See, you have no answer for him, because HE is right, and YOU are wrong. |
|
|
| (600139) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Apr 13 03:43:52 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by Forest Glen on Sat Apr 12 02:27:57 2008. You are wrong, as several people have outlined. |
|
|
| (600146) | |
Re: Connecting Montauge Street Tunnel to Fulton Line, etc. |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Apr 13 04:01:35 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by SMAZ on Sat Apr 12 20:58:27 2008. It would be a very interesting option to have the cut from the Montauge Street line to the Fulton Street line, and it might not be a bad idea to do that anyway, but I still think even with that, I would eventually have the SAS, if extended to Brooklyn go through a new tunnel to get to the Fulton line in Brooklyn (though that doesn't change my opinion that the Nassau connection to the SAS should also be built regardless of whether the segment to Water Street gets built as well). |
|
|
| (600148) | |
Re: Connecting Montauge Street Tunnel to Fulton Line, etc. |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Sun Apr 13 04:08:39 2008, in response to Re: Connecting Montauge Street Tunnel to Fulton Line, etc., posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Apr 13 04:01:35 2008. Even with a (W) to Fulton via a new cut, a split (T) via Nassau/Montague could replace the (M) to Bay Pkwy. |
|
|
| (600150) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Sun Apr 13 04:12:33 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Osmosis Jones on Sat Apr 12 23:18:38 2008. Can Montague handle three lines (although one of them does not deserve to run on it)?Sure. 10 (R) + 6-7 (W) + 6 (M) = about 23 TPH at most. The 60th St tunnels handles about 25 TPH with the (N/W/R). Which service doesn't deserve to run on it? |
|
|
| (600156) | |
Re: R Train Improvements Instead |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Apr 13 04:24:46 2008, in response to R Train Improvements Instead, posted by KLCS on Sat Apr 12 20:45:28 2008. My proposal to mitigate the ending of G service in Queens with supplementing local service with the E apparantly has a lot of ooponents.I thought it only has ONE opponent? |
|
|
| (600161) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Sun Apr 13 04:37:40 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by jsun21 on Sat Apr 12 23:37:12 2008. I would make the (W) to Astoria an 18/6 service at the combined TPH of today's (N/W). That's about 15 TPH during rush hours. The Fulton Local would get as many of these (W) trains as necessary with the surplus turning at Whitehall St. The (N) would go up the Upper SAS to help the (Q). It would then run from CI to Astoria via Montague late nights and Sundays. The weekday service would get rid of merges/diverges on both the Bway BMT AND the Fulton IND while providing an alternative service to Fulton riders. The cut I propose would go from the Court St BMT station directly to the outer H-S tracks. It would merge with those tracks east of the TM. The IND Court St stub would remain unaltered. I think that Fulton local passengers would prefer the (W) over the (C) anyway as long as it at least meets current (C) headways. I also don't think it would be fair to Lefferts riders to turn their current service into a semi-local. That wouldn't be politically viable anyway. A (C) express on the other hand would give them at least the same if not better headways then the (A). (A) trains currently serving Lefferts would go to the Rockaways giving those communities enhanced service. A win-win-win without the cost of new underwater tunnels. Perhaps one day, if such tunnels were to be built from the SAS Water St Line, they could then be connected to the TM stub and serve as the basis for either a Utica St Branch from the Fulton Local or connect with the Crosstown after H-S and give that trunk Manhattan service. |
|
|
| (600164) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Sun Apr 13 04:38:54 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 12 21:32:52 2008. lol, let's hope there isn't another V-M mini thread again. You guys made like 3-4 too many of them.More like a dozen too many. :-) |
|
|
| (600213) | |
Re: Connecting Montauge Street Tunnel to Fulton Line, etc. |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Sun Apr 13 09:02:58 2008, in response to Re: Connecting Montauge Street Tunnel to Fulton Line, etc., posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Apr 13 04:01:35 2008. I'd rather connect the Rathole to the Myrtle Avenue Line. |
|
|
| (600238) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Apr 13 09:54:50 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by SMAZ on Sat Apr 12 20:22:42 2008. I posted that "idea" on SubChat And SUBTALK years ago...along with a reconfiguration of the Bway,8th Avenue Local and Nassau st lines in Lower Manhattan...Through routing the 8th Avenue Local to the BMT Broadway line at Cortlandt/WTC...rerouting the Broadway line at City Hall to the Nassau st line Between Fulton and Broad st....and building a connection from the Montague tunnel to the Fulton St local at the Court St station[recommissioning the station for passenger use,moving the Transit exibit to City Hall Upper Level]... This Would have been a good time to start building such a plan..since the WTC.. This would NOT be an "easy" job...[I could almost hear the swearing already!] |
|
|
| (600259) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Apr 13 10:11:47 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by SMAZ on Sun Apr 13 04:37:40 2008. LION would make the (W) to Astoria a 24/7 service!The (N) and the (Q) will both have to go to 125th Street (via Second Avenue) until such a time as the (T) train can have a southern Second to run on. The (R) will continue to Continental. This means there will need to be many more (W) trains, and they will have to be local on Broadway: The Bway Express tracks feed Second Avenue, the Bway Local tracks feed the 60th Street tunnel. Some (W) trains will terminate at City Hall Lower Level, some will terminate at Whitehall Street, and some will continue on via the RatHole to 9th Avenue, and can cover Ft. Hamilton on the late-nights. The (V) train will provide 24/7 on the Local Queens to Metropolitan. ROARING |
|
|
| (600277) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by qveensboro_plaza on Sun Apr 13 10:57:44 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Edwards! on Sun Apr 13 09:54:50 2008. Aside from cost factors, are there any engineering barriers to the idea of a Montague Tunnel-Fulton Local connection, i.e., relative depths of the two tunnels or ground conditions?It is an interesting concept (even without a possible SAS link)that could have a significant positive impact on service patterns. |
|
|
| (600451) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by jsun21 on Sun Apr 13 17:21:35 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by SMAZ on Sun Apr 13 04:37:40 2008. I appologize for misreading the post on which Court St you wanted to use. To be honest the idea of short turning surplus W trains at Whitehall won't happend because any subtraction you do only robs Fulton riders of trains in the rush hour. I can tell you've put a lot of thought into thought into the idea of the W going up Fulton. However I just see the W as a bad choice, over the past 100 years there has been no direct 4th Ave service from Fulton, as a matter of fact there isn't even a transfer to 4th Ave on Fulton, but so far no one has complained...well not loudly. Riders that need 4th Ave can transfer to 6th at Jay St and walk two blocks. In my humble opinion, this cheap fix isn't worth saving people a two block walk. Although it creates a unique transfer it also creates a bottle neck on the platform which I brought up in my previous post. I feel a lot of people will jump off their W and immediately jump on the next 8th Ave train, people that may have otherwise stayed on the local are now all forced to fit on an already loaded train. The ridership has adjusted their life to fit their transportation, very few people will have a use for. I think this plan is a win-precieved win-and a tolerable loss.I'm wondering why you think that current Fulton patrons will want the W over the C given that they have nearly equal headways. Also turning the C train add 6 trains to the express line in addition to the 9 A trains. 15 Expresses and 6 locals seems a bit unfair, more so than the easy transfer Lefferts riders would have to make. In fact this thread was started because QB riders felt shafted getting clobbered by 3-4-5 expresses for one local, certainly doing that to another line for a transfer that isn't all that needed isn't fair. I really think we could make the Lefferts crowd happy if we held an A for the C at Euclid, It would require good timing at the Lefferts terminal but I think we can make it happen. |
|
|
|
Page 3 of 8 |
||
