Can they change the weekend headways on the (2)(3)(4)(5) and possibly the (6)?

[BrooklynIRT]

The current weekend TPH on each of these five lines:

 

has 5 TPH (with very, very inconsistent headways going southbound and insane crowding, I might add)

 

has 5 TPH (and tends to be right behind the going southbound, and when this happens it is not nearly as crowded as the , I might add)

 

has 7.5 TPH (or 15 per two hours if you want to use whole numbers only)

 

has 5 TPH

 

has 7.5 TPH (or 15 per two hours)

 

-------------------------------

 

I think they should change them to this:

 

gets 6 TPH instead of 5

 

gets 4 TPH instead of 5

 

gets 8 TPH instead of 7.5 (or 16 per two hours instead of 15 per two hours)

 

gets 4 TPH instead of 5

 

gets the same 7.5 TPH (or 15 per two hours),

 

or gets 8 TPH instead of 7.5 (or 16 per two hours instead of 15 per two hours) to keep Lexington at 20 TPH

[Amtrak7]

The closer the headway, the greater delays caused by GO's and flagging are exacerbated. That's part of the reason why the MTA reduced weekend headways in 2010, in addition to the money.

 

Most weekends the 5 is GO'd to 3TPH anyway.

[BrooklynIRT]

..but this keeps the TPH the same on the lower WPR line and Lenox/7th Ave EXP/Eastern Pkwy LCL lines.

 

The was reduced to 12 minutes from 10 in like 2002 or something, as the internet archive will indicate. The was always 12.

 

Are you saying they absolutely cannot do anything about the fact that the southbound and so often arrive right on top of each other followed by no or train for 10 to 16 minutes (and that next train is usually a ) when they are supposed to run every 12 minutes each and every 6 minutes combined?

 

If it is okay to run 4 TPH on the every weekend, maybe they could bump the up to 6 TPH and then run 4 TPH on the and maybe just leave the and alone. The problems the has with delays and overcrowding affect a lot of people since this line is the longest one and serves more areas than the other four.

 

This is terrible for any Nostrand Ave rider who is waiting at 96 or 72 (I know the further north you go the less likely you are to find Brooklynites, but still). The even gets crush loaded in Brooklyn, especially south of Atlantic, whenever it is too far behind its leader (the leader or the leader).

[RollOver]

I'd like to see the , , and run 6 TPH throughout the weekends. The , and can still run 7-8 TPH. The Brooklyn IRT services should all have the same intervals on weekends so that way they are better matched and equalized. Oh, and the 42nd Street Shuttle can still run 12 TPH like it always does when its running.

[4P3607]

5 TPH? That's every 12 minutes... Typical of the , even right after rush hour.

 

I'd like to see something done about the ... Right before rush hour starts, and when schools get out, during that period where half the NB trains go Express and extra trains still haven't come out of the yard, the headways are 5 TPH. Every 12 minutes at that time? Usually I can just barely fit on the train with that many school kids on there.

 

Speaking of horrible service, the most serious case has to be the around 11:30 PM to 12:00 AM... Around the time the is supposed to go local. What usually happens is there's a 30 minute gap between the 2nd to last and last train, and they don't send any local. Instead, people have to wait up to 30 minutes, or even 40 (since that likes to go express to 71 due to its lateness from the crowds), and the platform at Roosevelt Avenue gets more packed that rush hour, sometimes so packed it's dangerous to be down there. The MTA seriously needs to do something about this. Just because it's 12 AM doesn't mean everyone has stopped trying to get to local stations on Queens Blvd!

 

What pissed me off even more is when I was originally waiting at Queens Plaza, an came in after the one I got off of, saying it was going express. I then watched in disgrace as it switched to the local track with a crowd on the platform and no one telling us. I then decided to wait for the next , which went express. Also, that was basically empty. They could have sent that local! It was the last of the night, it didn't have to leave 71 by a certain time. It's as if the MTA just said "f**k you Queens Blvd Local passengers" and sends everything express. 

 

I try to avoid Queens Blvd at that time or just walk home from Roosevelt if I do happen to get entangled in that nightly mess. Something really does need to be done about this...

[GreatOne2k]

MTA violates it's own guidelines on Saturdays with the , , and . During the day time policy headways are supposed to be 10 minutes, not 12 minutes.

[RollOver]

 

I think they should change them to this:

 

gets 6 TPH instead of 5

 

gets 4 TPH instead of 5

 

gets 8 TPH instead of 7.5 (or 16 per two hours instead of 15 per two hours)

 

gets 4 TPH instead of 5

 

gets the same 7.5 TPH (or 15 per two hours),

 

or gets 8 TPH instead of 7.5 (or 16 per two hours instead of 15 per two hours) to keep Lexington at 20 TPH

 

I'd really like to know your reasoning of why the and trains should be given the short end of the stick during weekends...     

 

15 minutes? What rock are you living? You want Brownsville and East New York residents to be crush onto overcrowded trains during the busier times on Saturday and Sunday (depending on their commute to the city's populated areas where they work at and later back home)? And I don't wish to hear "oh but these two lines are the only IRT A Division services that are supplemental".

 

The train often gets the short end of the stick on weekends but I hope they keep it fully 10 minutes instead of 10-15 minutes which constantly caused severely overcrowded trains on that line as well as the . I'm sure additional riders between East 180th Street and 3rd Avenue-149th Street also want Lexington Avenue service.

 

Please don't hugely cut service to the (and the in general) on weekends from a train every 12 minutes to a train every 15 minutes. Do so and then you'll also create massive overcrowding on the and . So again, nope.

[NYSubwayBuff]

What I would want is the 5 going to Flatbush/Bklyn College on weekends, it would make up for the fact that the 2 has not so good headways by sending the 5 there, like say 1 train every 20 mins to Flatbush while the rest terminate at Bowling Green

 

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk now Free

And the 5's in between (assuming 10 min headways) would terminate at bowling green

 

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk now Free

[BrooklynIRT]

Actually if nothing is going to be done about the problem, I think the way a Nostrand Ave rider (not living within walking distance of Nostrand Ave-Eastern Pkwy) coming back from the city or Downtown BK should deal with crappy service (assuming s/he has already entered the system and sees that the next is 10+ minutes behind the next ) is by taking the to Nostrand and then walking or lightly jogging to Sterling and taking the B44 SBS to wherever they need to go (after Nov. 17).

 

I say Sterling instead of St. John's because the traffic is so slow and the traffic signals are so crappy on Nostrand between Eastern Pkwy and Empire that it takes a pedestrian little effort to get from Eastern to Sterling (after getting off a ) faster than a B44 LTD/SBS when the bus lane is not in effect on that part of Nostrand. So it is usually better to go to Sterling for a B44 SBS than it is to go to St. John's (Lincoln), especially if the B44 SBS is seen anywhere between however far north and however far south on Nostrand a person can see after coming up from the train.

 

Much better than waiting (after entering the system at whatever station) 9 or 10+ minutes for a delayed and terribly crowded to show up if that is 9-10 minutes behind its leader.

 

I think we can forget about running the to FB on the weekends because of operating costs and some confusion if half the trains are going to one terminal and half to the other (I think we want to minimize that).

 

RollOverMyHead, how many more people ride the than the in the Bronx?

 

Does the get as terribly crowded and delayed as the ?

 

What about the South Bronx riders who can just use the connection at 149GC if they do not want to wait too long for a ?

 

Does the get as crowded as the ?

 

How is train ridership compared to train ridership in Brooklyn assuming the trains are running on time, which they often are not going southbound?

 

Does the get as crowded in Brooklyn as the when both lines are delayed?

 

You do realize that southbound they usually have the coming just a few minutes after the , right?

 

Admittedly even the trains have a tendency to run 16+ minutes apart on weekends for whatever reason (MTA's bad dispatching?), but they are also usually right behind the trains as I said earlier, so I would be surprised if those trains (all the trains that come down 2-5 minutes after the ) were as crowded east of Utica as the is north of Times Square and south of Atlantic when it is delayed (and is usually 9-14 minutes behind its leader, which is usually a train, when it is supposed to be only 6 behind its leader).

 

At the end of the day I think the people who have the worst problems off all these riders are the ones using the north of Times Square; this is what we might want to fix.

 

The to B44 SBS connection basically solves the problem for able-bodied riders along Nostrand, but not for riders north of Times Square!

[Guest Lance]

The problem we have here is another example of bad bunching. In this case, we have the leading 2 trains falling behind schedule, probably because of the aforementioned inadequate service. That lack of service means more often than not, people are squeezing onto trains and increasing their dwell times in the stations, especially along White Plains Rd where the duece is practically holding down the line on its own. I bet you a buck the 3's are running at or close to the schedule. They just can't be held to even out the spacing because of the trailing 2's behind them. I see BrooklynIRT's point for adding more trains to some lines, the 2 especially, I don't see why it should be done at the expense of other riders. While the 3 and 5 lines could almost be called supplemental lines to the 2 and 4 respectively, reducing service on the former two would simply negate any benefits of the service increases to the latter two.

[BrooklynIRT]

I see BrooklynIRT's point for adding more trains to some lines, the 2 especially, I don't see why it should be done at the expense of other riders. While the 3 and 5 lines could almost be called supplemental lines to the 2 and 4 respectively, reducing service on the former two would simply negate any benefits of the service increases to the latter two.

-AndrewJC said the West Side line is capped at 17-18 TPH (his exact numbers were 17-18, not 17.5) on weekends despite loading guidelines, so if the gets one more TPH and neither the nor the   is reduced, there will be more than 18 TPH on the West Side.

 

-MTA would hold on to the operating costs argument like a baby holding onto a pacifier or milk bottle.

 

-I do not know if the East Side line is also capped at some unfortunate TPH like the West Side line is (East Side is currently at 20 TPH, normally).

[N6 Limited]

Southbound, Would it make sense to send a out to 135th st in front of a before the gets to Grand Concourse to help even out the crowds or does that mess with the crew's scheduling?

 

Northbound, are the 's scheduled to lead the 's from Franklin Ave to even out loads? I'd think that a would have less passengers because many transfer to the at Utica, etc

[BrooklynIRT]

I always thought it would be a great idea to always have the a couple of minutes in front of the instead of the even separation that the schedules say the trains are supposed to have (even though they often do not, and the uneven separation that currently happens is the nonsensical one, which happens every weekend).

 

It seems like a better idea on the southbound than on the northbound though. Northbound, trains always leave Flatbush on time unless there was an abandoned interval or a severe delay.

 

...but I have seen 16+ minute separations in northbound trains close to 241 in subwaytime as well! Usually at night.

 

Basically when each service is pretty much 12 apart on the branches and pretty much 6 apart on the trunk, the does not get terribly crowded.

 

Things get bad if trains are about 15+ apart on the branches and about 9 to 10+ apart on the trunk. Of course 15 apart on the branches almost never means an even 7.5 apart (average) on the trunk; usually 15+ apart on the branches is accompanied by 10+ apart on the trunk. The longest I ever saw on a train board in a station was 14 ( train I was on was followed by a that would come 14 later, and no in between); longest I ever saw in subwaytime was 16 (again, on the trunk, not the branches).

 

just to clarify the schedule currently calls for even separation during the times that each service runs every 8+ minutes. 8 minutes on the branches = 4 minutes on the trunk, 12 on the branches = 6 on the trunk. rush hour is a totally different animal, but middays/evenings/weekends the schedule says even separation.

[RollOver]

@BrooklynIRT

 

So just because the and trains do not get crowded (if they are delayed), that means they should slash their headways to 15-20 minutes on weekends? Do you know how many East New York and Brownsville residents change to or from the at Utica (depending on their everyday commute)? If you also cut the 's present headway from a train every 10-15 minutes to a full 15 minute wait, you would also overcrowd the and . Why not just treat their headways equally? Run all those four lines every 8-10 minutes on weekends (like they do on middays and evenings) like I suggested before. I'm sure this will benefit much more than reducing service on the said supplemental lines.

 

What next? You're gonna suggest that the gets cut from a train every 10 minutes to a train every 15 minutes just so and riders can get more service? I can almost guarantee you that most supplement lines are seated load with fewer standees during the off-peak while 24/7 lines are generally standing-room (crushloaded on occasions). For example, who's to say that the CAN'T run anymore than 15 minutes instead of 10 minutes JUST SO the can get the service boost? What about the customers at all of the local stops between Hoyt and Euclid? Including the local stops between 168th and 59th on weekends (when the isn't there at all)?

[BrooklynIRT]

Well, as I said before:

 

-MTA would hold on to the operating costs argument like a baby holding onto a pacifier or milk bottle. (This is why running all the services every 8-10 minutes is hard to do, plus...

 

-AndrewJC said the West Side line is capped at 17-18 TPH (his exact numbers were 17-18, not 17.5) on weekends despite loading guidelines, so if the   gets one more TPH and neither the   nor the   is reduced, there will be more than 18 TPH on the West Side. (This is also why it is very hard to increase TPH on one line without reducing it on another)

 

The BMT and IND is an entirely different animal and I do know know it as well as I know the IRT, so no comment there.

 

This is a catch-22..or should I say a catch-

[LTA1992]

Operating costs mean a lot. If you didn't know that by now, go play Simutrans, Cities in Motion, or Cities in Motion 2. You'll see how much operating costs matter.

[40MntVrn]

I think we can forget about running the to FB on the weekends because of operating costs and some confusion if half the trains are going to one terminal and half to the other (I think we want to minimize that).

 

Off-peak weekday trains are often turned at Bowling Green--some are often rerouted along 7th ave during the rush, I'm sure it wouldn't be super confusing.

 

The 6 has two terminals during rush hour and people seem fine with that.

 

I do agree with the operating costs concern.

[BrooklynIRT]

Operating costs mean a lot. If you didn't know that by now, go play Simutrans, Cities in Motion, or Cities in Motion 2. You'll see how much operating costs matter.

And thus I stand by cutting the and to increase the (and probably the and maybe the ), assuming you are correct.

 

I do not like doing things like that, but this is simply what we are working with and it will not change unless..something.

 

They so often wind up having like 2-4 and trains in a row running a good 13+ minutes apart that it seems like it would not even be so terrible to just run the and 15 apart and make sure they are a consistent 15 apart, if this is even possible.

 

Better to have a couple of or trains 15+ apart than to have a couple of trains 16+ apart (in attempting to be lenient, I even consider it ok if the trains are no more than 15 apart, but only with the scheduled 12-minute headway, as a scheduled 15-minute headway on the during the current 12-minute hours would be horrible).

 

I do not really see the thing about negating the benefits though because the trunk line service levels (in TPH) would be unchanged, at least on the West Side line and the WPR line (for those who can take either the or there).

[Guest Lance]

The problem is that the 3 and 5 trains run fine on the weekends, mainly because the 2 and 4 pick up the brunt of the ridership on the 7th and Lexington Avenues lines. If you want to maintain cost neutrality (that's the term you're looking for), you can axe the 3 entirely and run the 4 local in Brooklyn and make the 5 a full weekend Dyre shuttle while running the lost trains as 2s and 4s. The spacing issues won't be resolved though since people will still continue to pile onto the train, thus delaying it from its scheduled even intervals. I guess what I'm saying is that cost-neutrality isn't the way to fix the spacing problems plaguing not only the IRT, but the system in general. It simply shifts riders from one train to another, which usually has its own problems to deal with.

[RollOver]

And thus I stand by cutting the and to increase the (and probably the and maybe the ), assuming you are correct.

 

I do not like doing things like that, but this is simply what we are working with and it will not change unless..something.

 

They so often wind up having like 2-4 and trains in a row running a good 13+ minutes apart that it seems like it would not even be so terrible to just run the and 15 apart and make sure they are a consistent 15 apart, if this is even possible.

 

Better to have a couple of or trains 15+ apart than to have a couple of trains 16+ apart (in attempting to be lenient, I even consider it ok if the trains are no more than 15 apart, but only with the scheduled 12-minute headway, as a scheduled 15-minute headway on the during the current 12-minute hours would be horrible).

 

I do not really see the thing about negating the benefits though because the trunk line service levels (in TPH) would be unchanged, at least on the West Side line and the WPR line (for those who can take either the or there).

 

SMH...

 

How about I put this straight fair and square...

 

According to the official timetables, the and are both scheduled every 6-8 minutes during rush hours, 8-10 minutes on middays and evenings, and 12 minutes on weekends.

 

The and are both scheduled every 6-8 minutes during rush hours, 8-10 minutes on middays and evenings. The former runs every 8-10 minutes on weekends while the latter runs every 12-15 minutes at the same time period.

 

Why are you so eager to slash service to the two supplemental lines, therefore, forcing crowding on the two supplemental lines as well as the 24/7 lines to raise well above than what loading guidelines call for? Why give the part time lines the short end of the stick as an expense? This isn't a general order. If any of the A Division routes have a reliability problem, then efforts should be logically made to fix that reliability problem. Cutting service to the part-time lines and throwing more trains onto the 24/7 lines solves nothing. Again, you're just yanking off trains from other lines to make up service for another. How does that seriously help? Ask yourself that.

 

What about the residents of Brownsville and East New York in Brooklyn who use the to make transfer connections to other lines for direct access to other areas where they work at? What about the additional riders in South Bronx who need the rather than being crush onto the already-crowded and (those two of which are already crowded with their own riders who are heading off to the West Side and East Side work destinations respectively)?

 

Think about all that for a second.

[BrooklynIRT]

Well RollOverMyHead, everything was laid out pretty clearly in this thread:

 

-The people who ride the between the Bronx and Manhattan suffer more than all the other riders we have discussed here since those trains are ridiculously crowded when they are delayed and 12-minute headways do not help at all; when it is delayed it even gets a lil heavy south of Atlantic.

 

-MTA will not hold trains as Lance suggested in post #10.

 

-The and get hit much harder than the and on the weekends.

 

-LTA1992 can provide more insight about why operating costs matter so much. I will just agree with him for now since it seems to make plenty of sense to me.

 

-Nostrand Ave riders can solve the problem by using the to B44 SBS connection to get to wherever faster than they would by waiting for a delayed and crowded that is 9+ minutes behind its leader if the next train to come is a and the is coming soon.

 

-This does not solve the problem for Bronx/Manhattan riders, who are getting the worst of all this. That Nostrand Ave solution is also not the best solution for Nostrand Ave riders; and does not solve the problem for all the riders between Harlem and Crown Heights who get stuck waiting 9-14 minutes for a delayed and crowded train after missing one.

 

-You said all of these things about more riders being packed into the and even though I said TPH would be increased on those lines.

 

-The WPR line is much busier than the upper Lenox line (that is 148 and 145 only). It gets hit harder than the Lenox, yet upper Lenox and WPR get the same number of West Side TPH.

 

-The upper WPR and Jerome lines are each busier than the Dyre line. They get hit harder than the Dyre. Yet upper WPR and Dyre get the same number of TPH.

 

-Considering the fact that I have no intention of ever living anywhere near where the runs in the Bronx or Manhattan, I suppose that whether the problem gets solved simply depends on how badly everyone wants the problem to be solved and which solution makes the most sense given what we are currently working with. I am not sure if what I proposed was the right answer. Do not worry, I will not attempt to get them to increase the while decreasing the by myself.

 

-There are people who ride the 2, whether it is delayed and crowded or on-time, and have to make transfers to other transit lines just like those who ride the 3.

 

-I think there is much more demand for the 2 in the South Bronx than there is for the 5. Otherwise why does the 2 suffer so much more with both services running the same TPH...?

 

----------------------

 

Lance: Yes, I was even thinking about running one West Side service from E 241 to Flatbush, a second West Side service from Dyre to New Lots, each every 12 minutes so it would be 6 on the trunk (with the trunk now being E 180 to Franklin instead of W 135 to Franklin) and 12 on the branches (with the branches now being Dyre, upper WPR, Livonia, Nostrand instead of upper Lenox, WPR, Livonia, Nostrand).

 

And run an East Side express service from E 149-GC to Bowling Green every 12 minutes.

 

It would mean no train service at Lenox Term or W 145-Lenox though.

 

And it would mean lots of confusion with people having to get used to a West Side service running on Dyre every weekend and no Lex service on WPR at those times.

 

Or just leave everything alone indefinitely unless a lot of us who participated in this discussion intend on living anywhere near where the runs in the Bronx or Manhattan lol

[BrooklynIRT]

Although in all of this I do apologize for not reminding you that these are just the solutions I come up with based on the operating costs problem. I am sorry if I sounded harsh. It is a rather unfortunate situation. It is just the material world, but still.

 

Anyway the situation cannot really be changed without money I suppose. That is just the way it goes. I (and we) must not forget that we are all dealing with the same problems across the entire city and are basically in this together.

 

And as I did say in post #21, I am not sure what the right answer is to the problem given the current situation.

 

You might say some of us are going off the rails on a crazy train...I certainly feel like I am sometimes lol

[S78 via Hylan]

Your ideas aren't bad, but I don't agree with reducing service on the and just to improve the . (This was from looking at your older posts).

[BrooklynIRT]

hence why we cannot do anything without more money. it is indeed a catch-

[Brooklyn]

I might receive some criticism for this, but I think I would have the go local to New Lots during the weekend (Brownsville and East NY would love this LOL)

 

I would add more TPH during the busiest times. I think 8 would do the trick.

 

I would actually cut the during the weekend. I know people who live at 148th will be very unhappy though.

 

The train is completely horrible--I feel for regular riders of that line. When I worked in the Bronx, I took the Lex line whenever I could, even if that meant taking the and simply walking a little more (the 6 train is very close to the 2 in the south bronx).

 

The should see 8 TPH as well.

 

Essentially, this is a nighttime schedule with more TPH (minus the train).

 

I think this is the simplest and easiest thing to do.