|
|
| Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20 (717730) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 5 of 5 |
||
|
| (721197) | |
Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Dec 16 13:16:42 2008, in response to Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20, posted by RonInBayside on Tue Dec 16 12:47:11 2008. "They could easily fit another route on the Queens Blvd local tracks; they just need to arrive at a solution to the fumigation problem."And you know this how? Maybe from reading postings on Subchat? Numerous NYCT employees have posted here that there is no reason the QB local tracks couldn't handle 30 tph, except for having to evict the people at Continental. |
|
|
| (721199) | |
Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Dec 16 13:19:43 2008, in response to Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20, posted by RonInBayside on Tue Dec 16 12:47:11 2008. The MTA has found excuse after excuse to NOT run weekend and evening G service to Continental Ave. It's clearly trying to undermine the support for such service by using it's power to cancel it, forcing people to use other lines. I don't see the big deal, the idea of running G service to Forest Hills when the V didn't run was just a bone thrown to G riders when plans for V service were initially publicized. But many G riders still hate the Court Sq. x-fers and are adament about seeing any sort of G service to Forest Hills restored. |
|
|
| (721206) | |
Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Dec 16 13:28:20 2008, in response to Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20, posted by AlM on Tue Dec 16 13:16:42 2008. But you can't stop evicting people at Continental, so said 30 TPH capacity is impossible. Unless you extend one route to 179th St .... |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (721207) | |
Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Dec 16 13:28:21 2008, in response to Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Dec 16 13:19:43 2008. But many G riders still hate the Court Sq. x-fersI guess the MTA's point of view is that "many G train riders" is an oxymoron, especially when applied to that portion who actually want to get to Queens. |
|
|
| (721211) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Dec 16 13:30:19 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Dec 16 13:15:53 2008. But said problem isn't really fixable. Ever see the conga line into Continental during the afternoon rush? It's disheartening to see E's and F's pass you one after another as you wait to get into the station on an R or V.If the main concern is security for relaying employees, that can be provided. Let's not forget how many trains used to relay at 179 St, a station with a similar relay setup. I don't think there's enough demand for an entire route dedicated only to the extreme east side of Manhattan to justify the amount of capacity it would take to run one. You may be correct. In that event, it is still worthwhile to run more service on the R/V routes, even leaving aside the T. |
|
|
| (721212) | |
Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by Hank Eisenstein on Tue Dec 16 13:30:27 2008, in response to Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Dec 16 13:19:43 2008. Yes, all 26 of them. Bottom line is that the capacity of the Queens Boulevard lines is best utilized for the overloaded trains going to Manhattan, not the 4-cars and still mostly empty Crosstown line. |
|
|
| (721213) | |
Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Dec 16 13:31:47 2008, in response to Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20, posted by AlM on Tue Dec 16 13:28:21 2008. What the MTA wants to do is wait out the people who remember the time when you could transfer from G to E/F/R at Queens Plaza by just walking over to the other platform. It's already been 7 years (today, ironically enough) since the G was truncated to Court Sq. Eventually older riders will forget about that and newer riders will not remember it at all. |
|
|
| (721217) | |
Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Dec 16 13:33:40 2008, in response to Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Dec 16 13:28:20 2008. Unless you extend one route to 179th St ....That won't do it, either. Extend one route, and the congestion is still there; the local train to 179 St will still be stuck behind the one fumigating at Continental Av. But you can't stop evicting people at Continental Because? Let's see the reasons for that, and determine whether they can be met by processes other than the conga line. |
|
|
| (721218) | |
Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Dec 16 13:34:16 2008, in response to Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20, posted by Hank Eisenstein on Tue Dec 16 13:30:27 2008. I totally agree. |
|
|
| (721220) | |
Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Dec 16 13:36:48 2008, in response to Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Dec 16 13:33:40 2008. If one of the locals were through routed from Continental, half the trains would not have to be fumigated. This would ease the conga line in the PM rush. I remember when the R ran thru to 179th and it wasn't as bad. |
|
|
| (721229) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Dec 16 13:48:24 2008, in response to Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Dec 16 13:19:43 2008. The MTA has found excuse after excuse to NOT run weekend and evening G service to Continental Ave. It's clearly trying to undermine the support for such service by using it's power to cancel it, forcing people to use other lines.I don't see the big deal, the idea of running G service to Forest Hills when the V didn't run was just a bone thrown to G riders when plans for V service were initially publicized. But many G riders still hate the Court Sq. x-fers and are adament about seeing any sort of G service to Forest Hills restored. Aside from the inconvenience of Crosstown Line service under Queens Blvd, the bigger issue is that on paper, Queens Blvd local stations are supposed to see two routes at all times. Now we haven't seen the two routes, and we haven't seen them run extra service of the one route that is run. MTA simply implemented a de facto service cut, for years, without the legal process being followed. Every MTA rider anywhere should be worried about that prospect: of an unaccountable agency receiving taxpayer money whose officials aren't voted on by the people, and which can fund or not fund any project as it pleases, and let's not forget, borrow huge amounts of money that eventually the taxpayers will have to pay for. |
|
|
| (721238) | |
Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Dec 16 13:55:43 2008, in response to Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Dec 16 13:36:48 2008. You have the advantage over me in remembering what local service to 179 St was like, but I still think that logistically, it doesn't solve the problem, and it raises issues of adding merge difficulties. Not to mention that 179 St is a relay terminal too.... |
|
|
| (721271) | |
Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Tue Dec 16 14:41:01 2008, in response to Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Dec 16 13:36:48 2008. Putting the Rthrough to 179 St wasn't a bad idea; it's just that MTA got howls of protest from people who felt insulted at having a "local" (local = evil) serve their station. MTA can't always do what is operationally best regsrdless of popular opinion. That the 63rd St service plan was implemented was due to MTA's confidence (correctly placed) that most riders were best served by the plan and that the whining and bellyaching coming from crosstown riders could be overcome. |
|
|
| (721272) | |
Re: conspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Tue Dec 16 14:44:48 2008, in response to Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20, posted by AlM on Tue Dec 16 13:16:42 2008. "Numerous NYCT employees have posted here that there is no reason the QB local tracks couldn't handle 30 tph, except for having to evict the people at Continental"False. If anything, NYCTA employees here have pointed to the operational disaster that occured when MTA tried to mix that many trains together. And none of the employees posting had all the data. Fumigation is an issue but it's not the only one. I realize you'd like to run the transit system tomorrow, but maybe you should wait a little longer. :0) |
|
|
| (721273) | |
Re: conspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Tue Dec 16 14:45:55 2008, in response to Re: conspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20, posted by RonInBayside on Tue Dec 16 14:44:48 2008. Apologies to that last comment: it was dirercted at TrainsAreFun, not at you.However, the two previous statements still hold. |
|
|
| (721284) | |
Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Dec 16 15:25:29 2008, in response to Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Dec 16 13:55:43 2008. It doesn't solve the problem, it just eases it. |
|
|
| (721324) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Dec 16 17:37:24 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Dec 16 12:15:21 2008. I think I only saw that roll sign once. I don't remember if it was an R44 or R46. It was running in the other direction. Most JFK roll signs I think said "21st St-Queensbridge" for the North terminal instead of "21 Street-LaGuardia Connection". The LaGuardia Connection bus was short lived too. It's not on the April 1990 map. It may have been discontinued earlier than the JFK Express. |
|
|
| (721459) | |
Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Dec 16 22:33:05 2008, in response to Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Dec 16 13:33:40 2008. It worked before..when the R ran to 179th st all times...then rush hours...and G trains to 179th.. |
|
|
| (721462) | |
Re: conspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Dec 16 22:38:11 2008, in response to Re: conspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20, posted by RonInBayside on Tue Dec 16 14:44:48 2008. Tell me..how many R and V Operate during rush hours..?Correct me if I'm wrong,but.. I believe its 10 and 10.. leaving plenty of room for G trains... |
|
|
| (721464) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Dec 16 22:44:41 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Dec 16 13:48:24 2008. There ya go...The MTA MUST GO... |
|
|
| (721466) | |
Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Dec 16 22:49:50 2008, in response to Re: onspiracy theories; Archer Avenue at 20, posted by Hank Eisenstein on Tue Dec 16 13:30:27 2008. Mostly empty my ass.... |
|
|
| (721574) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Dec 17 03:42:28 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Dec 16 07:05:46 2008. It would be either having the SAS become brown, or the nassau line (and hence the M, J, and Z) would be light blue.....The main trunk line would be the Nassau St Line. The (J/M/Z) would be brown too. I would make AirTrain and PATH light blue on NYCT maps. Note: if a part of the SAS were to go down Nassau I would divert or merge the (M) to somewhere else. |
|
|
|
Page 5 of 5 |
||
