|
|
| Re: Brooklyn-Manhattan tunnels on (L) train to close in 2019 (1392515) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 3 of 7 |
||
|
| (1392974) | |
Re: Brooklyn-Manhattan tunnels on (L) train to close in 2019 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Apr 20 17:03:53 2016, in response to Re: Brooklyn-Manhattan tunnels on (L) train to close in 2019, posted by Joe V on Wed Apr 20 08:49:50 2016. Main St probably wouldn’t have been much more expensive than the extension of the 95 /4 extension was in the 1960s. |
|
|
| (1392975) | |
Re: Brooklyn-Manhattan tunnels on (L) train to close in 2019 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Apr 20 17:06:02 2016, in response to Re: Brooklyn-Manhattan tunnels on (L) train to close in 2019, posted by Joe V on Wed Apr 20 09:13:29 2016. R-32s aren’t CBTC equipped and I’m not sure if at this point that portion of the line can handle non CBTC equipment. |
|
|
| (1392976) | |
Re: Brooklyn-Manhattan tunnels on (L) train to close in 2019 |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Wed Apr 20 17:09:31 2016, in response to Re: Brooklyn-Manhattan tunnels on (L) train to close in 2019, posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Apr 20 14:46:28 2016. Certainly. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1392984) | |
Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Wed Apr 20 19:07:06 2016, in response to Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Apr 20 15:55:28 2016. NO. Just shut it all down! Add tail tracks at Eighth Avenue and renovate the stations. |
|
|
| (1392986) | |
Whoa Horsie: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Wed Apr 20 19:23:04 2016, in response to Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Apr 20 15:57:11 2016. Woah, horsie.Changing the subject title implies there will be a 14th St shuttle during the closure. That is an untrue statement because the service plan has not been decided yet. It's 3 years away. |
|
|
| (1392989) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Wed Apr 20 19:31:05 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Apr 19 08:38:23 2016. It makes no sense to turn at QP. That would affect the E in both directions. One mishap during the move and everyone at Ely not to mention all of QB) is boned.Add 5 or 6 additional (M) during peak, and 3 or 4 off-peak. During peak, alternate (M) go on to Parsons or 179th to reduce turning delays at Continental. Run the M to Queens 18/7 for the duration of the outage. The additional cars can come from the (L) pool. A variation on this could be to run those additional trains as <M> to/from Canarsie (kind of like the old JJ). One-seat to midtown would probably be a joy for many at that end of the line. How far from the station box is the crossover at Bedford? Can it be used to turn trains without them having to enter the station to clear the switch? If so, run the (L) between Canarsie and Lorimer (fumigating at Lorimer), then running light to the crossover. Otherwise, could they keep one track open that trains can pull in to just change ends? Alternatively, is there any way to install a crossover on either side at Lorimer? |
|
|
| (1392997) | |
Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Apr 20 21:13:58 2016, in response to Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Union Tpke on Wed Apr 20 19:07:06 2016. This is too rider useful to imagine actuallyu happening any time soon |
|
|
| (1393001) | |
Re: Brooklyn-Manhattan tunnels on (L) train to close in 2019 |
|
|
Posted by brightonr68 on Wed Apr 20 22:08:13 2016, in response to Re: Brooklyn-Manhattan tunnels on (L) train to close in 2019, posted by Joe V on Wed Apr 20 08:49:50 2016. Wake up, the mta will eventually eliminate one or both train operator postions . In a few short years we will have driverless cars in the hands of actually people. A driverless train is not as scary to the public. If you have the equiptment in place you can move in that direction. |
|
|
| (1393003) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Apr 20 22:56:56 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Wed Apr 20 19:31:05 2016. Exactly!That is why I do the M/T split with the (M) to 71-Continental as it is now and the (T) being a 24/7 line to 96th/2nd. |
|
|
| (1393004) | |
Re: POSSIBLE 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Apr 20 22:58:44 2016, in response to Whoa Horsie: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Wed Apr 20 19:23:04 2016. Okay, but I figured most realized with the Re: and the fact it's mid-subject that it was the discussion. |
|
|
| (1393005) | |
Re: POSSIBLE 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Apr 20 22:58:44 2016, in response to Whoa Horsie: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Wed Apr 20 19:23:04 2016. Okay, but I figured most realized with the Re: and the fact it's mid-subject that it was the discussion. |
|
|
| (1393006) | |
Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Apr 20 23:01:55 2016, in response to Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Union Tpke on Wed Apr 20 19:07:06 2016. The problem is, I think pols will WANT a shuttle between 1st and 8th Avenue no matter what even if the recommendations are otherwise. There are those (especially east of Avenue A) who actually use the (L) as the 14th Street Crosstown to get to other lines and would be impacted much more, especially given how slow 14th can be traffic-wise.And the work at 1st Avenue can take place anyway because only one-half of ONE platform would be needed for a shuttle since the portion from 1st to just west of 3rd Avenue would have to be single-tracked at all times anyway and as I would do it these would be four-car trains. |
|
|
| (1393010) | |
Sorry for the double post |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 21 01:28:51 2016, in response to Re: POSSIBLE 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Apr 20 22:58:44 2016. Sorry for the double post, my connection acted up when I did that earlier. |
|
|
| (1393024) | |
Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Thu Apr 21 12:20:30 2016, in response to Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Apr 20 23:01:55 2016. They can want it all they like. Doesn't mean they'll get it. With no way in or out except through the Canarsie tubes, these pols better be able to explain why it would be better to keep the reconstruction of the tunnels going on for years. And they better be able to explain why running L trains at SEVERELY reduced frequency for all those years is better than no service for a much shorter time period. Bringing in diesels to periodically tow trains back to East New York Yard for maintenance is not really a workable solution, because there will be instances where trains will suddenly break down and the diesels will not be able to get through in a reasonable time.Do these same pols have another idea for getting trains in and out of the 14th St subway for maintenance? No? Didn't think so! |
|
|
| (1393025) | |
Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Apr 21 12:35:37 2016, in response to Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Thu Apr 21 12:20:30 2016. The main reason for having a 14th Street shuttle, if the maintenance issues can properly be addressed, is to avoid all the extra buses that will be needed instead.The bus trip takes way longer than the subway trip, and of course a bus would have far lower capacity than a 4-car shuttle. You might need 12 buses vs. 2 4-car shuttles plus a spare. |
|
|
| (1393037) | |
Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Thu Apr 21 16:59:08 2016, in response to Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure, posted by AlM on Thu Apr 21 12:35:37 2016. But that's a big issue. Where would the maintenance of the shuttle trains be done if the only way in and out is through the tunnels? That would leave them with no choice but to shut down one tunnel at a time. How would they inspect or repair all of the undercar parts or repair the a/c units with very little clearance above and below the trains? |
|
|
| (1393038) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Thu Apr 21 17:13:17 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Apr 19 08:38:23 2016. I wouldn't extend the G to 71/Continental during the shutdown. One mishap on QB could completely screw up G service from Court Sq south. The G will become a major part of many L riders' commutes once the L tunnels get shut down and the MTA can't afford for the G to go down on a semi-regular basis by throwing it into the blender that we call the Queens Boulevard Line. |
|
|
| (1393068) | |
Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Apr 21 19:54:36 2016, in response to Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Thu Apr 21 16:59:08 2016. Where would the maintenance of the shuttle trains be done if the only way in and out is through the tunnels? That would leave them with no choice but to shut down one tunnel at a time.Tracks are a tiny portion of the work. Probably for much of the time one set of tracks or the other will be usable. Don't cars have a long mean distance between failures nowadays? I don't know if a shuttle is feasible. I do know that they will need a lot of extra buses on a very crowded street if they can't deploy a shuttle. |
|
|
| (1393069) | |
Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Apr 21 20:00:40 2016, in response to Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure, posted by AlM on Thu Apr 21 19:54:36 2016. A lot of people are on the L along 14th Street because that is where the tunnel is. It does not mean people have an over-arching desire to travel locally along 14th Street by train. Remove people headed to and from Brooklyn from the L train in Manhattan, leaving only intra-Manhattan riders, how many people would be left ? |
|
|
| (1393071) | |
Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Apr 21 20:11:32 2016, in response to Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Joe V on Thu Apr 21 20:00:40 2016. Remove people headed to and from Brooklyn from the L train in Manhattan, leaving only intra-Manhattan riders, how many people would be left ?A lot, if you measure them in busloads. I ride the L fairly regularly. On an eastbound trip, lots of people get off at Union Square, 3rd Ave, and 1st Ave. Still only a small fraction of the train's riders, but maybe 100 people (2 bus loads) from every train, and there's a train every 4 minutes. So you might need a bus every 2 minutes to replace the train. |
|
|
| (1393074) | |
Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Apr 21 20:32:19 2016, in response to Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure, posted by AlM on Thu Apr 21 19:54:36 2016. Don't cars have a long mean distance between failures nowadays?That begs the issue of how much maintenance must be done to achieve the long mean distance between failures. |
|
|
| (1393079) | |
Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Thu Apr 21 20:41:02 2016, in response to Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure, posted by AlM on Thu Apr 21 19:54:36 2016. The cars are due for inspection every 90 days. |
|
|
| (1393108) | |
Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Thu Apr 21 22:17:57 2016, in response to Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure, posted by AlM on Thu Apr 21 19:54:36 2016. Even if they do, you still have to be prepared for when a train could suddenly stall or malfunction in some other way. Regular and proper maintenance is key to keeping up the long mean distance between failures. With both tubes shut down, there's no way to guarantee the shuttle trains get regular and proper maintenance. |
|
|
| (1393115) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 21 23:16:41 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Thu Apr 21 17:13:17 2016. Actually, it would be to 179, and then only if it's deemed necessary to have the (G) reach Queens Plaza to take pressure off Court Square and also then only if you can't use 71-Continental as a terminal because you can't have the M/R conga line there forcing all three lines to 179 to keep things moving.This is also why, BTW I would split the (M) to an M/T with the T running to 96th/2nd at all times. |
|
|
| (1393135) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Fri Apr 22 08:06:35 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 21 23:16:41 2016. That's not any better because it would make the G even longer and make it even harder to recover from QB delays. And it won't take any significant pressure off Court Sq because displaced L riders will transfer at the first chance they get, which will be...Court Sq! |
|
|
| (1393140) | |
Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Apr 22 09:05:33 2016, in response to Re: 14th Street Shuttle during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Thu Apr 21 20:41:02 2016. I find it equally plausible that (a) there is no problem limiting the periods where no tracks are available to less than 90 days, or (b) that to do the tunnel overhaul they will need to have tracks in both tubes ripped out for much more than 90 days in a row, making a shuttle infeasible.No one else here seems to have any evidence in favor of either (a) or (b) either. |
|
|
| (1393147) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Fri Apr 22 10:47:59 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Apr 20 22:56:56 2016. No. There is no legit operational reason to send an Eastern Div route up Second Av (other than a situational reroute). Add additional (M) service, or interline a Canarsie <M>, on the existing (M) Forest Hills route. No muss. No fuss. |
|
|
| (1393149) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Apr 22 10:57:10 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Wed Apr 20 19:31:05 2016. It makes perfectly good sense to turn a few extra M trains at QP when the L tunnel is shut. The added M service is only needed between 23rd-Ely and midtown, so why run trains a distance that they'll be running empty.Whether it is operationally reasonable is another matter. You may be right that it's too risky, and if NYCT agrees with you they won't do it. But it would save them a lot of money if they can. |
|
|
| (1393152) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Apr 22 11:09:00 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by AlM on Fri Apr 22 10:57:10 2016. It makes perfectly good sense to turn a few extra M trains at QPGood sense within NYCT is an oxymoron. A couple of decades ago, I suggested that they add 3 short turned Lex Ave locals between BB and 59th St. Those extra trains would have increased the service level by something like 25%. A TWU shop steward emailed me that crew quarters would have to be built at 59th St. Such quarters required staffing. By the time everything was totaled up, those 3 extras required about 15 additional staff positions plus the capital expense of building the crew quarters. |
|
|
| (1393153) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Fri Apr 22 11:24:24 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Apr 19 08:38:23 2016. Again, you are not making actual operational sense.There aren't enough cars to extend the (G), period. There aren't enough cars to send the (R) past Continental. There may be just enough cars to send alternating (M)/<M> to Parsons or 179 during peak if Continental bogs down with fumigation/turnaround delays. All pax from Met or east of Myrtle should be discouraged from changing to the (G) unless they are heading south; or outbound on QB. Riders from Bedford should get direct shuttle buses hitting Marcy/Bway and Grand/Lorimer. For those needing any Manhattan destination, the travel time via the el (especially during rush) is sure to be less than taking the (G) to the (E)(M)(7). If service on the (L) can run from Lorimer, a bus bridge to the el should be made the preferred transfer routing for Manhattan, not getting on the (G). Otherwise, bustitutes should favor funnelling Manhattan-bound (L) riders to Bway over the (G). |
|
|
| (1393155) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Fri Apr 22 11:46:11 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Apr 22 11:09:00 2016. It's quite likely there are still crew facilities at QP from when the (G) used to terminate there during the overnight before the 90s.The operational issue is that to terminate there, those trains have to first fumigate, potentially delaying a follower. It needs a lineup, and time to clear the switch. Then, to head back to Manhattan, it needs a lineup that forces a wait on any (E) heading to QP. Once the move completes, there's dwell time. That could run to 3-5 minutes if there's an (M) against the wall. While the intent is to alternate routes, sometimes bunching has to happen to keep the railroad moving. And, heaven help everyone if there's a track issue, or a train lays down in the station or the plant. Tempting the fates is downright dumb. History has proven time and again that if something can blow up the railroad at the worst possible time, it probably will. Turning at QP should only be done in the event of disruption, B/O train, or some other special situation. |
|
|
| (1393182) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Apr 22 15:58:48 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Fri Apr 22 10:47:59 2016. Except you forget that the (M) is likely going to also have to run on weekends and QB will likely be unavailable at certain times to the (M) because of all trains running on either the local or express track at any one time then.The idea of the split M/T may seem illogical to you, but it also takes into account the CBTC situation on QB and the fact you'd probably have to send the (M) somewhere other than Essex anyway. Add to that if you sent the (M) to 96th/2nd on weekends, riders on the upper east side likely would demand that service be full-time and that's why the split of the (M) into the (M) and (T) with the (M) as it is now (currently 19/5 to 71st-Continental) and the (T) 24/7 to 96th Street and 2nd Avenue. As also said, this is something I would actually look at starting as soon as the (M) resumes running on Myrtle after that work is complete ahead of the (L) shutdown since the UES likely can use the 6-7 TPH this (T) would give it in addition to the (Q). |
|
|
| (1393184) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Apr 22 16:07:34 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Fri Apr 22 08:06:35 2016. Unless you are looking for the Broadway line, which you can get at Queens Plaza (and I would even consider making the (R) 24/7 during the (L) shutdown to accommodate that) OR (via a new OOS transfer) the (N) and (Q) at Queensboro Plaza. That's one reason why I would extend the (G) if that became necessary to 179. It's also why I would encourage people as much as possible (especially if they are looking for lower Manhattan) to take the (G) the other way to Broadway (and a new OOS transfer to the Broadway-Brooklyn line), Fulton Street (new OOS transfers to the (C) at Lafayette Avenue AND the 2/3/4/5/B/D/N/Q/R and maybe (W) at Atlantic Avenue-Barclays Center) OR Hoyt-Schermerhorn (transfer to the A/C).Like I said, this is why I split the (M) into the (M) and (T) and run the (T) to 96th/2nd at all times, also taking into account CBTC work that will be done on QB that likely with the (M) having to run on 6th Avenue anyway having to go to 96th/2nd anyway on weekends. Given UES riders would likely want that to be full-time (and they do have a ton of clout), that's why I would do the split. |
|
|
| (1393207) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Fri Apr 22 18:59:20 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Fri Apr 22 11:46:11 2016. There is more market need fora 2 weekend Queens Blvd locals that 2 SAS services. |
|
|
| (1393298) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Apr 23 16:52:24 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Apr 22 15:58:48 2016. I would suspect that by the time the work on the L starts, work on Qns Blvd will be over and the entire 4 tracks will be available 24/7 with the possible exception of some minor GOs. |
|
|
| (1393299) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Apr 23 16:54:50 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Apr 22 11:09:00 2016. Actually, crew quarters would not have been needed at 59 St since there is available space already at Bkln Br as well as a supervisor to handle those crews that need to be relieved there. |
|
|
| (1393312) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 23 21:17:47 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Joe V on Fri Apr 22 18:59:20 2016. Except for that one small issue known as CBTC work:It's no secret that work has to take place, and unless you want to suspend CBTC work entirely on QB until the (L) is back up and running that means you will have times where the (E) (F) and (R) all have to run express or local (i.e.: on the same track) in one direction. That makes running the (M) to 71-Continental on weekends at times impossible. That is the main reason why I would have the (M) run to 96th/2nd on weekends. Since UES riders would probably demand such a service also run during the week (and they have the political clout to force that), that's why I would do a split of the (M) from Metropolitan Avenue where the (M) runs 19/5 to 71st-Continental and the (T) runs to 96th Street and 2nd Avenue. That also likely reduces as noted before the number of trainsets needed for such a split service. |
|
|
| (1393314) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 23 21:23:00 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by randyo on Sat Apr 23 16:52:24 2016. I had heard that work is supposed to take several more years, meaning it likely will be still going when the (L) is shut down.Even without that, this split into the (M) and (T) is something as noted I would actually debut when the (M) resumes running its full route sometime in 2018, well ahead of the (L) shutdown. The additional (T) trains to 96th/2nd would mean a total of 20-21 TPH there at peak hours (since the (T) would be a max of 6-7 TPH even at peak hours) and would give (M) riders full-time 6th Avenue service since the (T) would be a 24/7 line that would eliminate the need for the late-night and weekend (M) shuttles. |
|
|
| (1393384) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Apr 24 19:32:12 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 23 21:17:47 2016. I would be fine if they suspended CBTC work for the duration of the Canarsie outage. CBTC brings only dubious results anyway with no additional TPH, the local tracks need more weekend service, the SAS will not. |
|
|
| (1393405) | |
Re: Brooklyn-Manhattan tunnels on (L) train to close in 2019 |
|
|
Posted by milantram on Sun Apr 24 23:15:09 2016, in response to Re: Brooklyn-Manhattan tunnels on (L) train to close in 2019, posted by 5301 Fishbowl on Wed Apr 20 15:00:39 2016. It's only one of the longest avenues in Brooklyn. Heck, my paternal grandmother lived just off of Avenue J. That's a long, long way from the L line station. LOL |
|
|
| (1393410) | |
Re: Brooklyn-Manhattan tunnels on (L) train to close in 2019 |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Apr 25 00:22:57 2016, in response to Re: Brooklyn-Manhattan tunnels on (L) train to close in 2019, posted by milantram on Sun Apr 24 23:15:09 2016. It is THE longest avenue in Brooklyn. |
|
|
| (1393826) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Thu Apr 28 11:46:53 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 23 21:17:47 2016. I seriously doubt there is sufficient demand for one-seat rides between the UES and stations along the Bway/Jamaica el to justify such a service at any time. If the handful or 2 of such riders on the UES had "the political clout to force [it]" they would not be riding the subway to Bushwick or Jamaica. Your continuing insistence on a Second Av "via Chrystie" service is beginning to sound like 33rd Street's ranting about having the clout to have the Chrystie connector permanently severed to guarantee continued (V) service originating at 2nd Av for him.The purpose of the exercise is to provide additional service along the Broadway el to ease crowding from displaced (L) riders traveling to/from Manhattan. Adding a few tph on the (M), possibly in the form of Canarsie thru-service, addresses that. Queens Blvd can readily accommodate the increased (M) service. If CBTC work continues into the (L) shutdown, weekend headways on the (E) & (M) would not prevent turning (M) at Queens Plaza. Your "(T)" fantasy simply doesn't provide any tangible, lasting benefits to (L) riders. It is far more likely that 3-5tph thru-routed Canarsie <M> 12-15/7 would prove far more popular. |
|
|
| (1393828) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Apr 28 11:59:54 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Thu Apr 28 11:46:53 2016. Worst comes to worst, the extra M's rush hour can't be sent to 179th, which is way under-utilized from pre-Archer days, and not fuck up 71st Avenue local terminations with any more fumigations. |
|
|
| (1393830) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Apr 28 12:22:20 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Joe V on Thu Apr 28 11:59:54 2016. can be sent |
|
|
| (1393846) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 28 14:42:50 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Thu Apr 28 11:46:53 2016. My thinking takes into account two things:1. The shortage of cars that should be somewhat alleviated (but not all that much) when the R179s come in). 2. CBTC work on Queens Boulevard. By splitting the (M) as I would (with the (M) as it is now 19/5 and the (T) to 96th/2nd 24/7), it would reduce the need for trainsets during peak hours, and even more so if you need to also have the (G) run on QB so those riders can have a one-seat ride to Queens Plaza to switch to the (R) to Manhattan there (or the N/W at Queensboro Plaza I would make an option via a new OOS transfer) so Court Square is not overloaded. Even if that reduction is only 1-2 trainsets, that can make a big difference with the car shortage that will remain until the R211s come on board. Then there is the issue of CBTC work on Queens Boulevard that likely would otherwise most weekends force the (M) to 96th/2nd anyway (as there is really no other good place before 145 in the current setup to turn in Manhattan) since the (E) (F) and (R) all likely have to run in one direction on the same track at the same time. That is a big factor as well. That's also why I do the split M/T. No, I don't expect such riders on the UES to go to Bushwick or Jamaica, however, such riders from Bushwick, Jamaica and Carnarsie who currently take the (6) from either Canal on the (J), Broadway-Lafayette on the (M) or Union Square on the (L) (with the 4/5 as well in the latter case) who are looking for the UES (where many do work in the many high rises that already populate there and are only growing in number) would likely be more inclined to stay on the (T) I propose, especially they work in buildings between 60th-65th (where such a (T) would stop before crossing to the SAS) OR north of 65th Street and 3rd Avenue or points east. |
|
|
| (1393850) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Thu Apr 28 16:59:38 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Joe V on Thu Apr 28 12:22:20 2016. I knew what you meant. :DI have also said this a number of times. Sending a few (M) on to Parsons or 179th can be worked into scheduling without adversely affecting any of the associated routes. Send a few (F) up Hillside express if need be to allow extra time for switching. Doing this would create no additional confusion or delays on QB than occurs on any given day. If anything, more people benefit from having a few additional locals on QB; and, a lot of people at the Canarsie end will be rejoicing if they get a one-seat "<M>" to Midtown. |
|
|
| (1393851) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 28 17:10:35 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Thu Apr 28 16:59:38 2016. Dupont Circle Station said:>>If anything, more people benefit from having a few additional locals on QB; and, a lot of people at the Canarsie end will be rejoicing if they get a one-seat " As they would with my (T) to 96th Street/2nd avenue, as well as those coming from Bushwick and other parts who actually work on the UES, especially in the many high-rise buildings that are there if it eliminates having to transfer to the (6) and/or cut down on their walking if they work on 2nd Avenue and points east (especially at New York Presbyterian on 68th-70th and York Avenue for example). |
|
|
| (1393852) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Apr 28 17:15:05 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 28 17:10:35 2016. What you keep not understanding is that if the L shuts down there will be a lot more people taking the G to Court Square and wanting to take an M or an E to midtown from there. |
|
|
| (1393857) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Apr 28 17:30:10 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 28 17:10:35 2016. How many people in Canarsie work 68th Street - 96th Street ?I don't think many. The peak flow on SAS is south AM, north PM. |
|
|
| (1393858) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Thu Apr 28 17:36:39 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Apr 28 14:42:50 2016. You are only making your arguments less convincing.(G) is NOT going back to QB. Period. That would require running 6 or 8 car trains; not to mention more of them. And, why the heck would they go to QP for the (R) when the (E)(M) and (7) are at Court Sq? Fewer (L) trains trains will be needed because of the shortened route. Those idle trains become the "<M>" runs. As I said, weekend headways would not prevent (M) from turning at QP. Unless QB work shuts down all service at Queens Plaza, there is no reason to reroute/turn the (M) anywhere else. And, sorry, but there simply cannot be that many people displaced from the (L), or regular Bway el riders, that would justify direct service to the area around 63rd St. Those who would usually transfer to the Lex at 14th may do so at Bway-Lafayette, or continue up to Lex/53. If they need to go farther up, same-platform transfer to the (F); or change at 34th for the (Q). All of the pieces are currently in place to make everything work with as little change in routine as possible for most people. Aside from my recommendation for thru-routed Canarsie service (which would directly benefit affected customers at both ends of the (M) route), there is nothing at all controversial. Keep it as simple as possible. Not every possible routing needs to be exploited just because a few people like it. That is why the (M) goes to Forest Hills, and not via Montague now. |
|
|
|
Page 3 of 7 |
||
