Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 03/25/2021 in all areas

  1. Be careful what you wish for, Mr. Albert. These people typically don't calibrate blanket service cuts too well. Yea, if they did a 20% blanket cut, it would right-size a BxM3 trip, but you'd probably cause a SIM1 trip to be packed to the gills. Kind of like if you cut 20% of M12 service you'd barely see the difference, but a 20% Bx12 cut would end up being disastrous.
    3 points
  2. In a sense, yes. However the design of the interlocking at Gold St is really what causes the problems. Operators are required to stop and physically switch their tracks and this requires all trains behind them, on both lines, to stop. The interlocking itself is designed like a mini roller coaster which slows trains too. Automating this process will speed things up. Deinterlining will speed it up even more since there are no merges. In the case of 2nd Ave/63rd St the merge wouldn't be as bad as Gold St but it would still be a merge none the less. The original 2nd Ave track layout (from the 70s that is) was supposed to account for this: https://www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?/img/maps/2ave-tr.gif With two sets of tracks at 72nd and 57th St stations you could manage the merges just fine. 72nd was then truncated to a three-track station (which would have also worked ok) but this was cut down to the present two-track station due to costs. Luckily we still haven't built Phase 3 yet and can still design it for a better merge. One issue with the 72nd St station was that it was too wide for the avenue. Building the 55th St station (location as proposed in the official Phase 3) with two levels, ala Archer Ave, would allow for much better merge ops and keep the station envelope safely under 2nd Ave. This is an alternative I've considered and one which might make more sense. I don't love terminating 6th Ave locals at 57th St but from a service level standpoint it'd be ok. By that I mean you aren't ever going to have nor need 30tph from Culver+Myrtle so 57th St can work fine capacity wise. Lets say 2nd Ave runs through Montague and down 4th Ave. Then the N/Q can be switched to Bay Ridge and Sea Beach (B/D via Brighton). 2nd Ave becomes a nice redundant trunk for these trains if there is a problem along Broadway. Same for if there is a problem along lower 2nd Ave, those trains can just run via Broadway. It's basically the same pairing as the and today. There still is 6th Ave redundancy with my plan, just a couple more moving parts. I'd say probably the only bad part of or to QBL exp is that you are sacrificing space on the trains. s use the longer IND cars while the or use the shorter BMT cars. If we keep to the QBL local this isn't much of a problem (as the is today) but it's a net loss for the express. I'm still a fan of having the and be the QBL exp via 53rd instead but there are arguments against this. 8th Ave local trains aren't as packed out as the express trains so you don't need 30tph to WTC. This is why I have the as a rush hour only train. The local will be plenty. It's another reason why I prefer and trains be the QBL exp so that they can take advantage of the extra capacity on Fulton St. Having 4 potential terminals (Euclid, Lefferts, Rock Park and Far Rock) gives you the flexibility to terminate more trains, and you need those more trains on QBL exp over anything else. Under this plan the would be cut off from a yard so it's a non starter. I'd argue the would still run to CI via 4th Ave local and keep 2nd Ave either terminating at Broad St or short turning some trains at Whitehall and interlining 2nd Ave down to CI. Obviously the last one is the least ideal. I gotta say, for all the time I've spent thinking about 2nd Ave and subway improvements, I hadn't come up with this. It's certainly not ideal but it is practical enough to be looked at. Assuming that a 2nd Ave/61st St station is built then the connecting mezzanine between it and the Lex/63rd St station would be about 800' This is less than the transfer between 8th Ave and 7th Ave at Times Sq so it's got precedent. The question then becomes just how many people are we now forcing to walk 1,600' every day? The Achille's Heel of 2nd Ave is that it doesn't really run through the heart of the CBD in midtown; rather it skirts it to the east. There are far more jobs between 7th Ave and Madison Ave than between Madison Ave and 2nd Ave so you really do have a sizeable demand for direct 6th or 7th Ave service from both the UES and Queens. So forcing more riders to make that long transfer seems to me to be a net loss. This is why, even after proposing to deinterline most of the subway network, I still see some benefit to reverse branching up 2nd Ave and into Queens. It ain't perfect but it solves the problem in the best way we can given our network limitations. That said, one thing I'm looking at is how to design Phase 3 with the right provisions for either express tracks to the Bronx or a new tunnel to Queens. At the VERY LEAST, for multiple reasons, Phase 3 must feature four-tracks between 42nd St and 63rd St. If you've got that then you future proof yourself enough to where we can put up with reverse branching while we watch how the future demand plays out.
    2 points
  3. https://gothamist.com/news/mta-still-running-heavily-subsidized-express-bus-service-despite-few-riders?fbclid=IwAR1PbvOkhtDHV9FREiVqBC7W__adoEZa9KmkgzWpwWZiGWETNl234hFiQXY
    1 point
  4. IDK if Andrew Albert is necessarily saying to cut express bus service (because the subway service was reduced), however it definitely helped the reporter frame that into his argument. I've definitely seen people using the argument that the express buses serve rich white people, which clearly isn't the case if you look at several Bronx, Brooklyn, and Queens express buses. When I used to use the BM5, the overwhelming amount of ridership was black on the bus I took. Of course when you're too busy trying to be a SJW, why bother putting anything into context? With the new passenger counters on the express buses, you'll get to see this claim of empty express buses debunked. I've been tracking the Queens express buses in the early morning the other morning and some of those are pretty well utilized. For example, the first QM4 trip alone had 28 riders onboard, and the very first QM5 trip had 23 riders. Now, the ridership per bus during the rush hour may be low on some buses, but they're not exactly empty either, and that will be the case with working from home. Plus, you'll need it just to maintain social distancing guidelines (and that's not even possible on some).
    1 point
  5. The ferries are run by the City, so not sure why you're mentioning Cuomo. De Blasio felt it was necessary to provide ferry service to areas without subways or with poor subway access, and there are many areas where the ferries run that are poor such as Sunset Park, Red Hook, etc. Coney Island has been wanting one for a while. The truly rich are not using any form of public transit. They use cars EVERYWHERE. I suppose if we keep railing on non-subway and local bus service, we can drive people off of the express buses, Metro-North and LIRR because upper middle and upper class taxpayers aren't supposed to have transit options.
    1 point
  6. dude are you the real vanshnookenraggen? i love ur website.
    1 point
  7. Not on the Random Thoughts thread...
    1 point
  8. Mr. Albert lives in a tony part of the Upper West Side where he can walk to the or the lines, numerous yellow taxis, and a plethora of local bus lines, in addition to Uber and Lyft, so he has no idea what it's like to have limited transportation options. What's further disgusting is that Danny Pearlstein from the Riders' Alliance has made transportation a class issue, as if the express buses only run in affluent neighborhoods like mine in Riverdale: Tell that to the people on Rochdale Village or other parts of Southeast Queens. We have a number of QM21 riders in my group that live far out and have no subway service and depend on their express bus service.
    1 point
  9. Once upon a time, there were people in this transit community that were dubbed "express bus haters" & the initial talking point of the article was the very talking point brought up in justification of said "hate"..... While there were instances of it on this forum, it was more prevalent on RD & subchat..... So basically, this isn't a "now it's the express bus" thing at all.... The hate for the express bus simply became dormant over the years.
    1 point
  10. Now I know they're not serious about that. If they were, they'd be trying to avoid this as much as possible, especially in Mineola and the Village of Hempstead. Hell, the way they describe the quality of existing services is misleading. Sure, they're infrequent, but there's no deeper dive into why. Worse, they somehow manage to imply that heavy rail is noisy because it's heavy, as opposed to the use of steel rails and wheels (which the proposal won't change) or the fact that the Oyster Bay Branch almost never uses electric trains due to a lack of electrification past East Williston. That's not to say that the idea is absolutely meritless, but they don't do a particularly good job of selling it with bad use of terminology, being really cheap, and failing to look into what elements are hampering existing service (the West Hempstead Branch in particular isn't only being hampered by the short reach or piss-poor frequency, though they certainly don't help).
    1 point
  11. IIRC the West Hempstead line is the remaining part of an original LIRR route. Line ran from Jamaica to Mineola, turning south to Country Life on the Hempstead branch and ran south to Valley Stream and back north to Jamaica. I have a friend who lives in Malverne and has never used the line in 20+ years. He either drives to Lynbrook or the Hempstead branch because many Babylon trains bypass Valley Stream completely. Said that the Franklin Shuttle puts the West Hempstead branch to shame. I know that the line is always on the LIRR chopping block and is basically a shuttle service itself most of the time. I’ve never been on the line but if the local residents don’t think much of it it’s future isn’t too bright, IMO. Of course if it’s closure is mentioned the residents and politicians will protest. That’s guaranteed. My take. Carry on.
    1 point
  12. Yeah, these things tend to follow a cycle where they become a popular fad and then things get out of hand. Fidget spinners, selfie sticks, wokeness, the whole "yeet" thing... I don't get it.
    1 point
  13. Abysmal... Pre-crisis. Let's just say the West Hempstead line makes the Far Rockaway line resemble Times Square.
    1 point
  14. Looks like a tweet and press release were issued https://new.mta.info/press-release/update-mta-new-york-city-transit-made-significant-subway-speed-improvements-during
    1 point
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-04:00

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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