|
|
| Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (597772) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 7 of 8 |
||
|
| (602670) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Apr 17 11:05:35 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Osmosis Jones on Thu Apr 17 06:58:38 2008. And this is because of the need to wait for (W) trains to enter and leave Whitehall Street. Thus LION suggested using CHLL for some of these trains esp if the (N) is sent to 125 with the new(Q).ROAR |
|
|
| (602671) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Apr 17 11:06:12 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by LuchAAA on Thu Apr 17 07:09:52 2008. There will be if the LION takes the (N) out of Astoria.ROAR |
|
|
| (602675) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Apr 17 11:34:21 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Apr 17 11:06:12 2008. There will be if the LION takes the (N) out of Astoria.If that happens there will be legalized lion hunting in Queens. Be careful. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (602700) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Forest Glen on Thu Apr 17 13:23:01 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Grand concourse on Tue Apr 15 18:31:01 2008. SO basically you don't care how bad local service is so long as the E is express?Basically. Local riders don't care about my commute so I don't care about their commute. If you spend over $80 for a monthly pass then you shouldn't have to ride a local on the weekend. |
|
|
| (602709) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Thu Apr 17 13:51:34 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by LuchAAA on Wed Apr 16 17:57:43 2008. From a previous message: "Brooklyn does not need the service Queens and Manhattan do. The turnstile counts are what you go by. Brooklyn does not justify as much service."Beware that such a argument using "turnstyle counts" can lead to situations where anyone can say that service should NOT be increased, especially when increasing the service offers intangible benefits besides an increase in ridership. For example, the "turnstyle counts" could suggest that only 6-car trains should be used to "fill up the cars" - which then leaves many riders running for the train, etc. Why use 8 and 10-car trains when the "turnstyle counts" only show enough riders for six full-crush-loaded-cars the bean counters would say. Why pay for extra cars on the train so the folks can sit down for the ride? If one wants to argue that a certain line needs more service (to make the rider better, increase the frequency of service, etc.) somebody somewhere will pull out the "turnstyle counts" argument. On Staten Island they used the "turnstyle counts method" to argue that the boats are not filled to the brim at certain times - so why provide service more frequent than 30 minutes or 60 minutes for a boat. Of course they forget that waiting 30 minutes and 60 minutes for a boat is something that REDUCES RIDERSHIP, it does not offer an incentive to use the system. Then of course they will argue that since ridership is not "increasing" let's reduce the service!!! Are the R-trains that serve Queens Blvd on the day-evening portions of the weekend - filled to the brim with riders? Are passengers left in the stations after a train departs because they simply could not fit inside the train? Is there is no room left on the trains to handle the loads of riders? Or is it a case where the riders simply do not like to wait long times for a train? How does one "weigh" intangible benefits such as available seats on the train? Or shorter waiting times with less than full-cars (or boats). When the MTA used to run 5-car trains in the 1980's - they simply said that the cost of cutting cars and coupling cars was simply too much for the supposed benefits. Or is running 8 and 10-car trains 24/7/365 just a waste of equipment, equipment that is not fully used to capacity at certain times? Just making a point. Mike |
|
|
| (602746) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Thu Apr 17 16:46:16 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Forest Glen on Thu Apr 17 13:23:01 2008. LOL.Essentially, because the local riders wouldnt feel perticularly bad about adding three minutes to your commute in exchange for knocking theirs down by about 10 minutes, they are insensitive? |
|
|
| (602748) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Thu Apr 17 16:50:05 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by R30A on Thu Apr 17 16:46:16 2008. Additional (R) and/or (G) service can also knock down their by 10 minutes. |
|
|
| (602757) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by error46146 on Thu Apr 17 17:57:55 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Grand concourse on Wed Apr 16 20:28:31 2008. that's why we should either increase the R service or have another train to supplement the R and the E is NOT one of them |
|
|
| (602758) | |
Re: E/F transfers to the 6 |
|
|
Posted by error46146 on Thu Apr 17 17:59:11 2008, in response to Re: E/F transfers to the 6, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 17 06:10:46 2008. the OOS transfer is BS, i ended up paying another $2 to get back in at Lex/59th station |
|
|
| (602759) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by error46146 on Thu Apr 17 18:02:07 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Michael549 on Sat Apr 12 00:33:56 2008. and the MTA has made the right choice not toi don't even know why these people want the E to run local so bad, if they actually rode it for commuting purposes on a frequently basis like me then they wouldn't be so angry and blah blah blah blah on me |
|
|
| (602773) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Apr 17 19:28:18 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by AlM on Thu Apr 17 11:34:21 2008. Hey. There *is* a Lion season in North Dakota.LION *knows* how to be careful out there. Then again, if you act like prey the LION will treat you as prey. (Thus spake the North Dakota Department of Game and Fish) ROAR |
|
|
| (602774) | |
Re: E/F transfers to the 6 |
|
|
Posted by Forest Glen on Thu Apr 17 19:29:42 2008, in response to Re: E/F transfers to the 6, posted by error46146 on Thu Apr 17 17:59:11 2008. the OOS transfer is BSIAWTP |
|
|
| (602779) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Apr 17 19:37:38 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by error46146 on Thu Apr 17 17:57:55 2008. Correct. The (V) should run 7 days q wk.ROAR |
|
|
| (602783) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Forest Glen on Thu Apr 17 19:42:09 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Apr 17 19:37:38 2008. If it means shutting the crybabies along Queens Blvd up then they should run it 7 days a week. |
|
|
| (602792) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by error46146 on Thu Apr 17 20:04:05 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Forest Glen on Thu Apr 17 13:23:01 2008. that's just mean, you don't care about my commute lol |
|
|
| (602821) | |
Re: E/F transfers to the 6 |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Apr 17 20:55:47 2008, in response to Re: E/F transfers to the 6, posted by error46146 on Thu Apr 17 17:59:11 2008. the OOS transfer is BS, i ended up paying another $2 to get back in at Lex/59th stationYou must have already used your card for a bus ride as well. I've entered many times at 60th/Lex and just been charged for a transfer, not an additional fare. |
|
|
| (602836) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Forest Glen on Thu Apr 17 21:44:15 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by error46146 on Thu Apr 17 20:04:05 2008. Again, the local riders didn't give a damn that the F line lost an important transfer to the 6, so I couldn't care less that their weekend service is anemic. However, I'm willing to compromise (V and E swap fleets or the F returns to its old route and then the E can run local on weekends). |
|
|
| (602840) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Thu Apr 17 21:48:29 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Forest Glen on Thu Apr 17 21:44:15 2008. The Local riders dont have any reason to give a damn.The new service pattern is superior to the old one because it PROVIDES A GREATER BENEFIT TO THE MAJORITY OF RIDERS. There are people who have a different commuting pattern then you in the world, you know. |
|
|
| (602851) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by error46146 on Thu Apr 17 21:59:06 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Forest Glen on Thu Apr 17 21:44:15 2008. cause you have the E line to make the transfer for the 6that's why i want the F line to run local instead of the E, the E has the big important transfer while the F does not |
|
|
| (602859) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Forest Glen on Thu Apr 17 22:07:17 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by R30A on Thu Apr 17 21:48:29 2008. The new service pattern is superior to the old one because it PROVIDES A GREATER BENEFIT TO THE MAJORITY OF RIDERS.No, it provides the greatest benefit to the riders with the strongest political representation. The same thing happened with the 2 and 5 in the Bronx. Even though WPR is much busier than Dyre Avenue the 5 is the thru express. |
|
|
| (602866) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Apr 17 22:18:10 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Forest Glen on Thu Apr 17 22:07:17 2008. You people do not understand how express trains work.The (2) train *owns* the route, and runs 24/7 making all of the stops. The (5) train is the supplement, It comes out to fill the extra needs of the day and/or of the rush hour. Thus it may be the express. The 24/7 Route rules, and is local The 16/5 route is extra and can be express. THAT is how it works out in the hinterlands. ROAR |
|
|
| (602873) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Thu Apr 17 22:31:11 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by R30A on Thu Apr 17 21:48:29 2008. Running the (E) local between Forest Hills and Queens Plaza hurts more customers than it helps IMO. I don't see the point in running the (E) local so local passengers can just give up the trains because they are already too crush loaded with Jamaica/Kew Gardens/Forest Hill passengers, and I think Jackson Heights will be too much of a mess if the (E) runs local with passengers packing themselves on the express (F). I think that the solution is to simply add more (R) trains or actually run the (G) up there once a year. |
|
|
| (602877) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Thu Apr 17 22:34:35 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Osmosis Jones on Thu Apr 17 22:31:11 2008. The QB local trains have very high use.The cost of running the E local is much less then adding R trains to any significant amount. |
|
|
| (602961) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view) |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Fri Apr 18 02:16:28 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 17 05:59:23 2008. Agreed. |
|
|
| (602966) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Fri Apr 18 02:31:21 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Michael549 on Thu Apr 17 13:51:34 2008. good points. |
|
|
| (603299) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 19 01:26:04 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Forest Glen on Thu Apr 17 19:42:09 2008. Oh so local riders are crybabies for wanting normal weekend local service [following the absence of the G] so that you get your express ride all the way to Manhattan... |
|
|
| (603300) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 19 01:28:42 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Osmosis Jones on Thu Apr 17 06:58:38 2008. That is why they should be spaced out like every other 3rd R train. And if there's any backups then one of them would be sent down to Brooklyn so there won't be any congestions.Whitehall's middle tracks allow for a train in the middle to also access the Brooklyn bound tracks. |
|
|
| (603301) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 19 01:30:15 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Osmosis Jones on Thu Apr 17 07:21:31 2008. Why would they? If these F's are supplemental service, while the regular F's are at normal headways, then why should they be outraged? Queens needs the additional service. But right now only the local is where the need for more service is at since the G will no longer run there on weekends. |
|
|
| (603303) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 19 01:32:43 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by R30A on Thu Apr 17 22:34:35 2008. Exactly, given the alternatives and the MTA likely wanting to take the cheaper option, making the E local would make more sense financially. |
|
|
| (603304) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 19 01:33:57 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Osmosis Jones on Thu Apr 17 22:31:11 2008. If riders wants to transfer at 53rd-Lex they'll stay on the E. |
|
|
| (603305) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 19 01:36:22 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by error46146 on Thu Apr 17 21:59:06 2008. I think he said he takes the E to take the D to the West Side. So he transfers at 7th Av.Technically he could take the F and take it to 47-50th to go back up to the nb platform for the D. [Sure it might cost a few min, but it could be an alternative so he won't have to ride the horrid R32's he so loves to hate.] |
|
|
| (603307) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 19 01:39:51 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Forest Glen on Thu Apr 17 13:23:01 2008. What about Woodhaven? I'm sure there are ppl that goes there for the mall and bus transfers. And guess what it's a local stop.So where does it say that for a monthly pass you have to ride the express? I have a monthly card and I ride the 2 to Manhattan which is all local in Brooklyn. {sure i could take the 4/5], but I'm going up the West side, not east so it doesn't make sense to transfer for a few stops then get off to get back on the 2/3 again. |
|
|
| (603314) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Sat Apr 19 01:58:00 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 19 01:39:51 2008. Forest Glen is pissed. Wait until he sees my suggestion for running the E local in Queens for certain GO's. |
|
|
| (603319) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Sat Apr 19 02:12:07 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 19 01:30:15 2008. This is really the wrong route (or perhaps terminal in this case) to run specials ending at certain places, with south of Kings Highway an exemption as not as much people ride it down there. This route is known to have delaying and bunching problems and turning trains at 2nd Avenue in addition to the (V) train will only make the problem worse with congestion at Broadway-Lafayette Street. Once several Brooklyn-Manhattan commuters start experiencing any problems consistently from these new specials, expect the Park Slope and Carroll Gardens politicians to complain. |
|
|
| (603321) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Sat Apr 19 02:13:21 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 19 01:28:42 2008. If you were to send one of them down to Brooklyn, wouldn't there still be a service gap heading back to Queens? Or am I missing something? |
|
|
| (603324) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Sat Apr 19 02:16:59 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 19 01:32:43 2008. It makes more sense financially, except it will be a pain to the MTA politically I'm sure since so many communities (more than the communities that use the local-only stations I'm sure) will be affected by this change. Give riders what they want and makes the most sense IMO, empty & more (R) trains, and express (E) trains. |
|
|
| (603325) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 19 02:26:33 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Osmosis Jones on Sat Apr 19 02:13:21 2008. The one sent to Brooklyn would then force a Brooklyn bound train to be changed to short turn at Whitehall and turn back to Queens [filling in]. IF it is an R46, all a c/r would have to do is change the side signs. It's not a big deal... |
|
|
| (603491) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Forest Glen on Sat Apr 19 11:29:21 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 19 01:32:43 2008. So it's all about money. At least we're being honest now. |
|
|
| (603493) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Forest Glen on Sat Apr 19 11:32:44 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 19 01:36:22 2008. I already tried the F train commute. Since the F gets held up at 75th Avenue and it loves to crawl along 63rd that commute makes me late. The only Queens Blvd train that gets me to my destination on time is the E and people are ready to screw that up as well. |
|
|
| (603495) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Forest Glen on Sat Apr 19 11:35:40 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by LuchAAA on Sat Apr 19 01:58:00 2008. Don't give yourself too much credit. There are many other people at Subchat who deliberately post ideas that are meant to hurt my community (eliminating the express bus, congestion pricing, running the E local). Apparently their personal contempt for me leads them to creating subjective service patterns. |
|
|
| (603666) | |
Re: Combining the M and V trains |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 19 16:29:16 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall (Make the statistics clearer to view), posted by SMAZ on Fri Apr 18 02:16:28 2008. Exactly!Combining the M and V makes both lines stronger, even if you have to cut the V back to eight cars. If cutting the V back to eight cars is such an issue for 53rd street, what could be done if the V is combined with the M and cut back to eight cars and becomes as 24/7 train from Metropolitan to 71st-Continental is to have it be the 63rd street line, with the F moved back to 53rd on a full time basis (and if the V were 19/7 to 71st-Continental with as I suggested for such during overnights the combined M-V being from Metropolitan-West 4th, then during overnights only the F operates on 63rd in place of the V). |
|
|
| (603704) | |
Re: Combining the M and V trains |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Apr 19 18:04:49 2008, in response to Re: Combining the M and V trains, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 19 16:29:16 2008. The only problem with putting a combined M/V service through 63 St is that the line will not serve Queens Plaza. Even if the R eventually goes back to 24/7 to Ctl that would mean that only one local line would serve Qns Plz. |
|
|
| (603709) | |
Re: Combining the M and V trains |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Sat Apr 19 18:14:24 2008, in response to Re: Combining the M and V trains, posted by randyo on Sat Apr 19 18:04:49 2008. And the bigger problem would be a totally overloaded F train. |
|
|
| (603742) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 19 19:28:55 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Osmosis Jones on Sat Apr 19 02:12:07 2008. :sigh: Fine, whatever. I'm not going drag this on any further.... |
|
|
| (603745) | |
Re: Combining the M and V trains |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 19 19:30:47 2008, in response to Re: Combining the M and V trains, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 19 16:29:16 2008. Look as much as I love this idea, this point has been beaten to death already. Please try not to make a whole mini-thread w/in a thread again....Thanks. |
|
|
| (603746) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 19 19:31:10 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Forest Glen on Sat Apr 19 11:32:44 2008. Well at least you tried it... |
|
|
| (603752) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Sat Apr 19 19:35:21 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Forest Glen on Sat Apr 19 11:35:40 2008. Running the E local has nothing to do w/you. Besides it isn't like all 3 major lines would run local. The F will still be express [w/its length, it has to].Of course it would be nice to boost R sservice or run the V on weekends if not for budget constraints... |
|
|
| (604028) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Apr 20 01:57:15 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by LuchAAA on Wed Apr 16 17:57:43 2008. Wrong...Brooklyn needs just as much service..if not more. The ADVANTAGE Brooklyn has over any boro except Manhattan is there are more lines than anywhere in any given area...especially Downtown. Can You tell me what the flip side is? |
|
|
| (604042) | |
Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Sun Apr 20 02:35:51 2008, in response to Re: G Train Hearing at City Hall, posted by Edwards! on Sun Apr 20 01:57:15 2008. The local stops on the R in Brooklyn don't need as much service as Queens based on turnstile counts. More ridership should mean more trains.What is the flip side? I don't know. |
|
|
| (604095) | |
Re: Combining the M and V trains |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Apr 20 09:12:10 2008, in response to Re: Combining the M and V trains, posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Sat Apr 19 18:14:24 2008. FTA told the TA they must run a 24/7 service thru 63rd Street once connected to the Queens Blvd line. That meant the F, not the V train.I agree it was a waste to build that Essex Street connection and only use it for 6 - 7 years. But is now gone and forgotten for 32 years now. The transfer between the J & F is easy, and the L has come back from the dead. |
|
|
|
Page 7 of 8 |
||
