Jump to content

F express in Brooklyn to start...this year?


46Dover

Recommended Posts

Idk, but let's stick to the topic at hand here

They share 2 Stations :)

why would you name the Rockaway service to a different letter they associated the (A) train with the Rockaways since the beginning of time , say you are a noob to nyc and you wanted to go to the airport you would take the (A) train not any other train, in that sense then you can rename the lefferts service to either an extended (C) or your malarkey idea of (K)

A "noob" would take the (E) to Sutphin Blvd or an Uber directly to the Airport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 226
  • Created
  • Last Reply

But there's no (A) in Kennedy! Yes, Airport starts with A, but " (K) for Kennedy" is pretty easy to remember. Easier than " (A) for Airport" because we have more than one. Besides, Kennedy Airport didn't even exist when Billy Strayhorn composed "Take the (A) Train" back in 1939. And the (A) was extended to Lefferts Blvd years before it was also extended to the Rockaways, so as the older service, Lefferts should get to keep the letter (A).

I suppose what could be done is have the (C) terminate at WTC with the (E) and run this (K) express in Manhattan and local in Brooklyn to Lefferts and leave (A) as-is, but then you cause problems on the (E).

 

Or run (K) to Lefferts express on Fulton Street, alternating with (A) like (6) and <6> and (7) and <7> do. Since (A) already operates like that - alternating between Lefferts and Rockaway, it's just changing the roll sign.

 

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

They share 2 Stations :)

A "noob" would take the (E) to Sutphin Blvd or an Uber directly to the Airport.

Savvy travelers who flew in to JFK and hates the Bx12 buses but have some money took the LIRR to Hunts Point, (7) to GCT and the (4) to Fordham...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose if the express is limited to rush hours only, then it would probably be better to use an <F> designation (which is not on the R46 cars, so the <F> would have to run R160s only). I've always understood the diamond bullets to denote rush hours-only services. But if it runs all day and into the early evening hours, then I think it should get a different letter like (V), because it would be running for a substantially longer time each weekday.

I always thought it asinine to have (Z) and (9) for skip-stop, but given that double letters went away in the 80s, that makes more sense.

 

But since <F> is running substantially on a separate track, calling it (V) doesn't seem necessary since rider confusion won't be rampant because of NTT stop announcements as well as having to "turn around" to get on it or (F).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Note that (9) and (Z) are serving different stops than (1) and (J) , making them different ish services. Diamond trains are just misssing stops, an easier-to-understand service change to a route than skip stop.

Even if <F> is not just for rush hours, I think that we still don't need a (V) . The <6> runs all day, and the <7> used too.

 

And fwiw, this is the only forum I can think of where the mods are wholly ignored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Note that (9) and (Z) are serving different stops than (1) and (J) , making them different ish services. Diamond trains are just misssing stops, an easier-to-understand service change to a route than skip stop.

Even if <F> is not just for rush hours, I think that we still don't need a (V) . The <6> runs all day, and the <7> used too.

 

And fwiw, this is the only forum I can think of where the mods are wholly ignored.

If you can do a <F> that would also work, if only to distinguish it from the regular (F) that would still run local.

 

And if I were at a Park Slope local stop, especially if I were working along 8th Avenue if a (G) came first I'd simply take that to Hoyt-Schermerhorn and do the walkover to get the (A)(C).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steering this back on track...

I suppose if the express is limited to rush hours only, then it would probably be better to use an <F> designation (which is not on the R46 cars, so the <F> would have to run R160s only). I've always understood the diamond bullets to denote rush hours-only services. But if it runs all day and into the early evening hours, then I think it should get a different letter like (V), because it would be running for a substantially longer time each weekday.

A slight correction. When the diamond services were introduced in '79, they meant rush hour services. That's why we had such routes like the <N> to Whitehall St and the full <QB> line, despite both of those running as locals. In 2005, the definition of diamond services came to mean express variants of local services, which is why only the <6> and <7> now qualify.

 

As for the designation of the proposed (F) express, I'd also go with (V). I cannot see foresee Transit spending money on new signs for the 50 or so 46s the (F) currently uses. Using a different letter in this case will better convey which route is the express and which is the local given the inability to easily discern express and local trains as it's done on the (6) and (7) lines. As it will be nearly ten years since the elimination of the (V) service in 2010, I do not see any issues with re-purposing the letter for Culver Local/Express service.

 

I always thought it asinine to have (Z) and (9) for skip-stop, but given that double letters went away in the 80s, that makes more sense.

Before the (Z) designation was introduced in '88, skip-stop service was run using only the (J) line. Skip-stop trains made either A or B stops, which wasn't an easy thing to tell unless you were familiar with the routes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for the designation of the proposed (F) express, I'd also go with (V). I cannot see foresee Transit spending money on new signs for the 50 or so 46s the (F) currently uses.

 

Which would probably lead the MTA to not use R46s on the express service.

 

I guess the MTA could use <F> designation on the R160s only. It's consistent with the <6> and <7> express variants, which pair with their respective local routes through their core sections.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Note that (9) and (Z) are serving different stops than (1) and (J) , making them different ish services. Diamond trains are just misssing stops, an easier-to-understand service change to a route than skip stop.

Even if <F> is not just for rush hours, I think that we still don't need a (V) . The <6> runs all day, and the <7> used too.

 

And fwiw, this is the only forum I can think of where the mods are wholly ignored.

an <F> would also denote peak direction service meaning one way only so if it is 2 way service then it may create another issue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

an <F> would also denote peak direction service meaning one way only so if it is 2 way service then it may create another issue. 

The <Q> ran in both directions, weekdays and evenings, between 2001 and 2004, and it was perfectly fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why would you name the Rockaway service to a different letter they associated the (A) train with the Rockaways since the beginning of time , say you are a noob to nyc and you wanted to go to the airport you would take the (A) train not any other train, in that sense then you can rename the lefferts service to either an extended (C) or your malarkey idea of (K)

 

So it's "malarkey" to want to make a subway line used by people getting to and from Kennedy Airport a bit more user-friendly? Um...okay...

 

And you might want to read up on the history of train service to/from the Rockaways before you say "they associated the (A) train with the Rockaways since the beginning of time." Notice I said "train service..."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

an <F> would also denote peak direction service meaning one way only so if it is 2 way service then it may create another issue. 

It's still an additional to the Local. Just like the <6> and <7>. Just bi-directional. I think it's only going to be rush hours. 

 

So it's "malarkey" to want to make a subway line used by people getting to and from Kennedy Airport a bit more user-friendly? Um...okay...

 

And you might want to read up on the history of train service to/from the Rockaways before you say "they associated the (A) train with the Rockaways since the beginning of time." Notice I said "train service..."

Dude, the Rockaways didn't become more of a permanent residence for common people until the LIRR was converted to subway, served by the A. Before that, it was a haven for the rich and amusement parks. Yeah, the letter changed a few times, but for most of the time since the conversion to subway, it has been served by the A. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But where exactly would this (V) run and where would it end? You certainly can not terminate it at Forest Hills, so I'm confused.

  

It would start at 179th St/Jamaica and end at Stillwell Ave. Just like it would if it were an <F>. What's so confusing about that?

The <Q> ran in both directions, weekdays and evenings, between 2001 and 2004, and it was perfectly fine.

That's certainly true. But the <Q> was meant to be a temporary designation for the Brighton Express service. They never planned to keep it once the Manhattan Bridge work was completed, unlike this <F> service, which would presumably be a permanent service.

 

But there was something interesting I found about the way Transit advertised the <Q>. They always showed it alongside the regular (Q) service on the maps and on the station signs. In fact I found many stations served by the (Q), where they later went back and pasted a <Q> sticker in a random space on the sign. On platform signs in Manhattan, the <Q> destination info was always shown separately the regular (Q) destination info. It's almost as if they were treating it as a separate service, rather than a sub-service of the (Q). I wonder if that's what they'll do with the <F>. If so, then they might as well use a different letter, like (V).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But there was something interesting I found about the way Transit advertised the <Q>. They always showed it alongside the regular (Q) service on the maps and on the station signs. In fact I found many stations served by the (Q), where they later went back and pasted a <Q> sticker in a random space on the sign. On platform signs in Manhattan, the <Q> destination info was always shown separately the regular (Q) destination info. It's almost as if they were treating it as a separate service, rather than a sub-service of the (Q)

Well, yes that was the case and IIRC, the  (Q) and <Q> even had different fleets: R68/As on the  (Q)  and R40/Ms and R42s on the <Q>.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, yes that was the case and IIRC, the  (Q) and <Q> even had different fleets: R68/As on the  (Q)  and R40/Ms and R42s on the <Q>.

That is correct. Once the <Q> was replaced with the (B) in 2004, the (B) started using the R40/Ms and R42s instead, while the (Q) used R68/As the whole time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't like the (brownM) move to 6 Avenue because of possibility of Culver Express service returned. That said, with the (W) returning, I think the best way to operate the (V) is to operate it rush hours only and have it serve as the Culver Local since its last service operation was a Queens Blvd Local.

 

Off note: I would've liked the (W) as a rush hour op only too

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back on the topic of using diamond symbols;

 

The SMEE put ins on the (W) have their rollsigns always set on diamond (W) when they come into service.

That is correct. Once the <Q> was replaced with the (B) in 2004, the (B) started using the R40/Ms and R42s instead, while the (Q) used R68/As the whole time.

I thought the (W) later replaced the (B) when it was on Broadway to reduce the confusion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the (W) later replaced the (B) when it was on Broadway to reduce the confusion?

The (W) replaced the (B) on the West End line in 2001, and was cut back to Whitehall Street when the (D) began running on the West End line in 2004.

 

It has no direct relationship with the yellow (B) line, although the routes may have been similar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has no direct relationship with the yellow (B) line, although the routes may have been similar.

Nope he's actually right. It was mainly to reduce confusion of having both a Orange and Yellow (B) Trains.

 

In a way the routes was somewhat the same. The only few differences was the W ran Express on Astoria during peak hours (Until January 2002) and the Yellow (B) only went to Astoria during Rush Hours. Otherwise the routes wasn't that different

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't like the (brownM) move to 6 Avenue because of possibility of Culver Express service returned. That said, with the (W) returning, I think the best way to operate the (V) is to operate it rush hours only and have it serve as the Culver Local since its last service operation was a Queens Blvd Local.

 

Off note: I would've liked the (W) as a rush hour op only too

 

The Culver Express can still run using half the current (F) trains.

 

Nope he's actually right. It was mainly to reduce confusion of having both a Orange and Yellow (B) Trains.

 

In a way the routes was somewhat the same. The only few differences was the W ran Express on Astoria during peak hours (Until January 2002) and the Yellow (B) only went to Astoria during Rush Hours. Otherwise the routes wasn't that different

 

He's saying that they didn't just say "You know what, a yellow B is too confusing, let's replace it with the (W)". They had the yellow B, then had the (B) run to West End, and then when they closed the bridge the second time, decided that instead of bringing back the yellow B, to call the service (W).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't like the (brownM) move to 6 Avenue because of possibility of Culver Express service returned. That said, with the (W) returning, I think the best way to operate the (V) is to operate it rush hours only and have it serve as the Culver Local since its last service operation was a Queens Blvd Local.

Off note: I would've liked the (W) as a rush hour op only too

  

Why rush hours only? I think the demand for midday and early evening express service is there, both for (V) (Culver express) and (W).

The Culver Express can still run using half the current (F) trains.

Yes, it certainly can. It'll just result in less (F) service at the local stations between Church and Jay. And between the (F) local and the (G), there will still be relatively frequent service at those stops. If they can schedule northbound G's to meet up with the expresses at 7th Ave, that would cut down on the number of riders who would be impacted by the loss of half the F's. Maybe this time it'll work.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  

Why rush hours only? I think the demand for midday and early evening express service is there, both for (V) (Culver express) and (W).

Yes, it certainly can. It'll just result in less (F) service at the local stations between Church and Jay. And between the (F) local and the (G), there will still be relatively frequent service at those stops. If they can schedule northbound G's to meet up with the expresses at 7th Ave, that would cut down on the number of riders who would be impacted by the loss of half the F's. Maybe this time it'll work.

I agree....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.