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 since 09/14/2019 in Posts

  1. 6 points
    Ah, yes, the totally-easy-to-reach Balcom Avenue. Are they smoking something?
  2. 5 points
    The 7th<>Church segment is scheduled 1 minute longer s/b thanks to the endless GT35s, and the Jay<>7th segment is 1.5 longer thanks to the fact that you really can't build speed/have to crawl out of Jay s/b. So runtime is 11 southbound and 8.5 northbound. Don't look at Kings Highway. The gets a 4 minute hold there essentially to pad the schedule -- they wanted to add runtime to reduce late clears and simplify crewing, but couldn't retime the entire line so they instead just put time at Kings Highway. It's doubtful that hold will be observed. Looking at 18th Ave, the 16:22 179 to KHF is 3 mins behind the 16:27 179 to STL , which had been 3.5 behind it at Jay. The real flaw in the schedule is, as I remember @RTOMan saying a few months back, that it creates massive gaps in Coney Island-bound service on Culver local/south of Church. Looking at the PM rush southbound schedule along the local (which, fwiw, is a not significant trip origin -- am using Bergen as my timepoint here) there's a 20 min gap where the first express used to be, and a 23 min gap for the second one. You can use the KH trains and the to reach the s, but even when you add those back in, you're looking at a 15 min gap following the first express at 18 Av, and a 17.5 min gap following the second. Definitely suboptimal. http://transitfeeds.com/p/mta/79/latest/stop/F30S/20190916 (18 Av) http://transitfeeds.com/p/mta/79/latest/stop/F20S/20190916 (Bergen) http://transitfeeds.com/p/mta/79/latest/stop/A41S/20190916 (Jay) Also, if anyone happens be fanning the northbound , may I humbly submit a request for a RFW? I'm out of town for a while, and haven't ridden B4 tk. north of 4th Avenue in a long time -- I want to reconfirm that the GTs going downhill from the viaduct towards Jay St are 2 shot 35s, becoming 30s and then 25s just before Bergen lower. Help here would be much appreciated.
  3. 4 points
    Few thoughts on the (PM at least) I was on the first. Something must be seriously wrong with local service, whether the switches at Jay or terminal ops at Church, if the is saving 6 whole minutes over the local on that stretch. Having said that, The first PM express was directly behind a local and was lightly loaded from 57th street on down. Might just be a poor interval, though. Culver Express is a lot more heavily timed than I expected, especially considering how lightly used it is. The viaduct's speeds were somewhat disappointing, although I suppose the interlocking by 4th Ave-9th St might have something to do with that I got to Jay Street northbound right after the second express left, and the platform was PACKED. That either doesn't bode well for future service, or means that the express should be scheduled to directly precede a local, IMO. This service pattern won't go away at the end of the trial, it's basically the 2 trains that would randomly go express during the PM peak, but officially in the schedule. The has potential, and is the key to allowing the to finally have consistent, reliable intervals. However, as many people have said, this relies on Bergen Street Lower being reactivated to provide a transfer point for Red Hook and Carroll Gardens residents. Unrelated but the displays as ( F ) on the advertising screens and I think that's neat. (63rd St- 8th avenue connection theories, anyone?)
  4. 4 points
    Just imagine how many closed subway entrances could be reopened and how many new entrances could be built with that money! This is an outrage!
  5. 4 points
  6. 4 points
    🙊 Conductor Kidding aside, the M9s are ridden by management as they're still in a test phase. So needless to say the guy got it pretty quick. I don't understand why people get bent out of shape over people taking pics, there's literally a camera to 204 at every station and one in the cab pointed right at you. 🤷‍♂️ Onto a completely unrelated note there are like 2 couples I see everyday, including the one at 9:04 in the video who make out like the apocalypse is coming...I just want to know how its possible to be that enthusiastic about commuting that they need to express themselves so rigorously.
  7. 4 points
    As promised, I am finally releasing my grand master plan for improving the subway system. This plan involves some new construction with service changes related to the new construction that improves subway efficiency. The new plan, modified from an old plan I posted here a while back, is called the New Program for Action, named after the original from 1968. My goal of the service is to expand service to areas that don't have convenient transit service, which will allow for service changes that will increase subway capacity. The proposals should also solve problems that were discussed on the past, namely: North Brooklyn-Midtown direct access Broadway service bottlenecks and reliability Queens Blvd Issues The list goes on, but its substantial. To reduce costs, I am aiming to limit tunneling to the most possible extent, using it only where necessary, such as in Manhattan and parts of Queens. The number of extensions I am adding are also limited to further lower them, picking only those that provide the best benefits for subway operations and passengers, and what is popular. Under my new grand plan, these new connections would be built: A connection between the Nassau Street Line and the 8th Avenue Line via Spring Street (underground tunnel to be built). Te connections will be two tracks and feature a new station along Spring Street between Broadway and Lafayette Streets (called Broadway/Lafayette on the map). This would create a second connection to an uptown trunk line and better serve the heart of Soho. A pair of East River Tunnels that connect both the Broadway Line and the planned Second Avenue Line (one tunnel) with the Fulton Street Line, using the old Atlantic Avenue Tunnel, the Court Street station (presently a museum), and the outer tracks and platforms at Hoyt-Schermerhorn. Concurrent with the above, a connection under Jamaica Avenue between the IND Fulton Street Line and the BMT Jamaica Line. This would permit demolition of the elevated structure over Fulton Street, with a short section connecting to the new subway for yard access. The line, which will be three tracks, will necessitate lengthening the stations on the elevated and the nearby yard to hold 10-car trains. New extensions (unless noted, all extensions will have two tracks, with stations having one island platform): An extension of the Astoria Line from Ditmars Blvd to LaGuardia Airport via the Con-ed power plant and 19th Avenue. Stations would be built at Steinway Street and Hazen Street to serve the local neighborhood. A new yard would be built in the power plant area. This extension would have to be built as an elevated line, since a tunnel through here would be impractical. However, access to LGA is created and there would be in increase in the number of trains that can turn around on the Astoria Line since trains will no longer have to terminate at Astoria-Ditmars using an inefficient switch operation. An extension of the Archer Avenue Line upper level from Parsons/Archer to SE Queens along the LIRR Atlantic ROW. LIRR service would be rerouted through St. Albans station. This was featured in the 1968 Program for Action, but my proposal slightly differs from it because I also added a station at 108th Avenue, and while the original plan had the line end at Springfield Blvd in Laurelton, my new plan now have the line end at the current Rosedale LIRR station at Francis Lewis Blvd. Not only would this allow for an increase in the number of trains that can turn around on the line, but residents would now reach midtown quicker compared to first taking the bus to the nearest subway. The new stations would include: 108th Avenue (side platforms) Linden-Brewer Blvds (side platforms) Foch Blvd (side platforms) Baisley Blvd (side platforms) Locust Manor-Farmers Blvd (unchanged from LIRR Side platform configuration) Laurelton-Springfield Blvd (side platforms) Rosedale-Francis Lewis Blvd (unchanged from LIRR Island platform configuration. An extension of the lower level Archer Line from Parsons/Archer to Hollis-Farmers Blvd via 93rd Avenue, with stops at 168th Street, 177th Street, 183rd Street, and Hollis-Farmers Blvd. This would not only serve Hollis, but allow for increase in number of trains that can turn around. An extension of the IND Queens Blvd Express tracks from 179th Street to Springfield Blvd. This extension would serve Queens Village. The station locations would be revised from the original proposal. Under my proposal, the line would use the D5 and D6 tracks (the D3 and D4 express tracks would be used for storage) and stop at: 188th Street 196th Street Francis Lewis Blvd 212th Street Springfield Blvd in Queens Village. An extension of the Concourse Line from 205th Street via Burke Avenue, Gun Hill Road, and Bartow Avenue to Co-op City. Stops would be built at: White Plains Road Bronxwood Avenue Boston Road-Laconia Avenue Seymour Avenue Gunther Avenue Co-op City - Bartow Avenue Not only would this allow better service to NE Bronx, but this would allow for a modern terminal for operations, ending the weird operation that forces a crew change at Bedford Pk Blvd instead of 205th Street. Second Avenue Subway extensions: A two track tunnel branching off the main section north of 116th Street and run under Second Avenue, the Harlem River, and along the AmTrak Right of Way to Co-op City. One of my most substantial extensions, the line would be two tracks and stop at Harlem-125th Street (under Second Avenue, with a passageway to the Phase 2 Harlem-125th Station), then merge with the railroad line to stop at the following stations: St. Anns Avenue Port Morris-138th Street 149th Street Longwood-Lafayette Avenues Hunts Point Avenue Westchester Avenue 174th Street 177th Street East 180th Street-East Tremont Avenue Unionport-White Plains Road Castle Hill-Bronxdale Avenues Williamsbridge Road Hutchinson Metro Center Pelham Pkwy Co-op City - Earhart Lane A two track extension of the main alignment along 125th Street with stations at: Lenox Avenue St. Nicholas Avenue West Harlem-Broadway/125th Extension of the 4th Avenue line to 101st Street to increase turning capacity. Reroute Canarsie Line service to neaby freight tracks, with stops at Broadway Jct, consolidating three stations that were nearby, and Sutter Avenue and Livonia Avenue. These routes would better serve upper Manhattan and the Bronx and relieve crowding on the Lexington Avenue Line IRT Branch extensions: Extension of the New Lots Line from New Lots Avenue to the Livonia Yard with a new station on the line within the yard at Linden Blvd. This would improve service to East NY and Spring Creek Extension of the Nostrand Avenue Line from Flatbush Avenue to Kings Hwy, with a stop at Avenue L. This would provide a modern terminal for train operations and improve service to Midwood These extensions would bring service to areas without subway service and increase capacity. My proposals involve rebuilding Rogers Avenue Junction and resignalling the IRT lines to do this. An extension of the Pelham Line from Pelham Bay Park to Co-op City-Bartow Avenue to bring subway service to Co-op City. An extension of the Flushing Line from Main Street via Northern Blvd to Little Neck. Another one of my substantial extensions, the three track line would make stops at: Parsons Blvd (local) 150th Street (express) 162nd Street-Crocheron Avenue (local) Utopia Pkwy (local) Francis Lewis Blvd (local) Bell Blvd (local) Springfield Blvd (express) Alley Pond Park (local) Douglaston Pkwy (local) Marathon Pkwy (local) Little Neck-254th Street (Express terminal) This extension would better serve NE Queens. Enough of the talk about the extensions, lets talk about the service changes (using only the bullets available on the NYC Transit Forums Library): 8th Avenue, 53rd Street, and Concourse: One of the lines most impacted by the new Program for Action is the . Under this plan, the line, which travels via 6th Avenue, would continue its normal routing, but would now do so via 8th Avenue. The service, re-designated the , would operate at 10 trains per hour, and combined with the at 15 trains per hour (see below), service on the entire 8th Avenue-53rd Street corridor would become more frequent. To make room for this, the would have to move to the express tracks, and since the service would run at 10 trains per hour, combined with the at 15 trains per hour, service becomes more frequent on the express tracks. I did modify my service patterns for north of 59th Street. Originally, I planned to install new switches south of 59th or 42nd Street to ensure the service continues running local north of 42nd Street. However, valuing frequency (in this case) over direct service, I now have the and service running local north of 59th Street, while the and go express north of 145th Street, with all service on those two lines running local north of 145th Street and up to 207th Street together, giving Washington Hts and Inwood riders more frequent service. The only drawback of this would be that Concourse riders would see slower service, but service would be more reliable and frequent. The deinterlining of both the 59th Street and 145th Street interlockings means the end of having the entire B division be scheduled around it. On weekends, service would be the same, except for no service (though service between 145th Street and Prospect Pk can be added if demand is available). On late nights, the and would continue its local operation, but service would unfortunately be supplemented by the . service would terminate at 59th Street-Columbus Circle. 6th Avenue, 63rd Street, and Culver: The rerouting of the means that capacity of the 6th Avenue Line is available for more efficient service. Here, the additional capacity would be taken by a revived . During weekdays, service would operate between Jamaica-179th Street and Kings Hwy (Coney Island if switches were reconfigured to increase capacity) running the same route as the , but via Queens Blvd Local in Queens and Culver Express in Brooklyn. I decided to terminate it at Kings Hwy due to possible capacity constraints at Coney Island, and the fact that most of the express passengers who would benefit from this live north of the Kings Hwy, which is more dependent on the Culver Line compared to south of there with its plethora of nearby alternatives. However, service would be faster for the majority of customers south of Church Avenue. On weekends, service would terminate at Second Avenue instead of Kings Hwy to provide adequate weekend service on Queens Blvd service in place of the (See below). There would be no late night service. As for train frequency, service would be at 15 trains, while and service at 10, creating more frequent service. Queens Blvd and Upper Level Archer: On Queens Blvd, the and would replace the and respectively on the local tracks, while the and would continue to use the express tracks as it does today. However, the two local services would be extended to 179th Street, extending the express runs past 71st Avenue. At this point, Woodhaven Blvd would be converted to an express station. In addition, with the new extensions, the would go to Springfield Blvd, while the would go to Rosedale, and that service will be increased to 15 trains per hour. This would allow for faster service from the outer areas of Queens that don't have subway service presently. Combined with the Lower Archer extension (See below), bus service would be rerouted from Downtown Jamaica to new locations along the new extensions, reducing congestion in Jamaica and allowing for the bus routes to serve better purposes than subway feeders. With 20 trains per hour on the local tracks and 30 on the express, which splits into 15 for the branches, and 25 for both 53rd and 63rd Street crossings, service becomes more frequent. With this, the would no longer be needed. Planned weekend service will not change from planned weekday service. During late nights, the and would be running local. Initially for my grand plan, I had proposed a bypass that would run on the LIRR Main Line. This was dropped due to logistics of connecting it to the Rockaway Beach Line, and the fact that I felt the connection to the QBL at 71st Avenue is contentious (SE Queens trains would first have to run local, then get on the bypass). The connection to the 63rd Street Tunnel also proved to be contentious because of concerns of capacity constraints through the tunnel. Even with the resigalling of the line and the removal of the Brooklyn reverse branch via Chrystie Street, the capacity issues would still remain, so I dropped it for now. That can be built later once all the issues are ironed out. I also planned a shuttle bus loop service in Long Island City during the day to replace 6th Avenue and Broadway service at Queens Plaza. However, seeing the fate of the Williamsburg Link B91 and B92 (later the B91A) service, which serves a similar function of my proposed line, I decided to drop it to avoid wasting bus resources. Instead, to garner ridership, I am proposing waiving fates on Manhattan crosstown bus lines. Broadway, Astoria, Upper Second Avenue: With Queens Blvd service restructured, the would not be on QBL anymore. Instead, service would be rerouted back to Astoria full time. service would also be moved to the Second Avenue Line with the . With the extension to LGA, both the and would be extended there. Without this extension, one of the lines would have to terminate at Queensboro Plaza, or both lines could serve Astoria, but service levels on each would be inadequate to accommodate the potential crowding. This would allow for more reliable service on the whole corridor. In addition to this, there would new service patterns on the upper Second Avenue. Under these new plans, with the new extensions, the and would not turn west along 125th Street. Instead, they will split off from the main line north of 116th Street and run via the Amtrak extension to Co-op City. This would allow for direct service between areas of the Bronx along the Amtrak ROW and Midtown Manhattan, something that is presently unavailable. Meanwhile, the would swing west on 125th Street and go crosstown to Broadway, allowing for faster crosstown travel. During late night, the , , and (see below) would all run local on the line. As for headways, service would run at 15 trains, the all other lines all at 10 trains per hour, allowing for more frequent service. Lower Second Avenue, Fulton Street, Rockaways, Jamaica, and Lower Level Archer: With the on Astoria, there would be a change in service in Brooklyn. Here, the line would use the new tunnel and be rerouted to serve the IND Fulton Street Line local tracks to Euclid Avenue. service would replace the on 4th Avenue (see below). The would become the express to Lefferts Blvd, allowing the to serve Far Rockaway. Initially, I had the go to Rockaway Pk, but this was changed due to potential scheduling concerns, even with the express . As a result of the new switch, the Rockaway Park Shuttle would now see increased service to 10 trains per hour, and would now run at all times except late nights, when service would be extended to Euclid Avenue in Brooklyn. In addition, the current shuttle to Lefferts Blvd would be replaced by an extended . To replace rush hour service to Manhattan from Rockaway Park, Q53 bus service would be enhanced. For Lower Second Avenue, I am proposing that phases 3 and 4 be built as 4 tracks south of 63rd Street, with express stations at 55th, 42nd, Houston, Grand, and Hanover. The Express tracks would be used for train storage and reroutes in the interim. From here, the would then use the new line to reach Brooklyn, where it would merge with service. From here, the two lines would run together to Broadway Junction, where it would split and run on the new lines and existing Jamaica Avenue Elevated to Hollis. This would provide more frequent service on Fulton Street, and allow for faster commutes to Lower Manhattan. service would be shortened to Broadway Junction (See below). I had also initially proposed a reactivated Rockaway Beach Branch to speed commute to Manhattan. However, given the concerns we had about it, I scrapped it as well. This can also be added at a later time. 4th Avenue, Nassau Street, Broadway-Brooklyn and Myrtle Avenue: To replace service, service would be extended to the new 101st Street Terminal. service would also operate between Broadway Jct and 101st Street and the would be folded (noticed how I did not say eliminated) into the , which will now run at 15 trains per hour. Combined with the at 10 trains, service becomes more frequent between Myrtle Avenue and Bowery. To address concerns about lack of additional service on West End, additional service would be provided. During late nights, the all service would be local except for the (Shortened to Broad). Now there are concerns about the Broadway service designations on both Fulton and 4th Avenue, with some arguing that the remain on 4th Avenue, and the take the new Fulton routing. However, I proposed the service the way I originally did it because I wanted the Fulton-Broadway Link to run 24 hours a day to maximize viability of this connection. However, service would be using the same train crews. Canarsie: Reroute service via the freight line. Simple. Crosstown: Only frequency changes to the service are proposed, and nothing else. IRT: With extensions and the rebuild of Rogers Avenue: and to Kings Hwy via Utica via Livonia to Linden to Co-op City and to Little Neck. Here is a map describing all of my changes: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1SeL9tHd9_mr2gLertrqJd329ADbTJpts&usp=sharing Feedback is welcome as well (however, due to how large and extensive this post is, I do not recommend quoting this post). If you have comments on these proposals, you are welcome to reply.
  8. 3 points
    Obviously Artics do offer more space, but the whole process is for nothing when you eliminate a ton of runs to pack people who would normally be on 5 40 Footers, onto 2 Artics. One thing is to Articulate a route to reach a route's growing demands, another is simply articulating a route to make people wait longer and pack them onto a single bus.
  9. 3 points
    That was a pretty interesting race to watch. Too bad he didn't have the sign:
  10. 3 points
    $37,303,000,000 for NYCT, $3,512,000,000 for MTA Bus= $40,815,000,000 $7.1 Billion for Signal Modernization $5.2 Billion for Station Accessibility $6.1 Billion for Subway Cars $4.1 Billion for Station Improvements $2.6 Billion for Track $2.3 Billion for Replacement Buses $1.1 Billion for Electric Buses $.109 Billion for "Improving Customer Experience" $.217 Billion for Additional Buses "Allows network redesign to provide more and better service" - Presumably, Operations funding would go up as well $.880 Billion for Depots $5.165 Billion for SAS +SAS ($1.735 billion from 2015-2019 Program) Entire project will now cost $6.9 Billion! $6.9 Billion-$1.735 Billion=$5.165 Billion These groups account for $34.871 Billion of the $40.815 Billion for NYCT/SIR/MTA Bus, meaning that there is $5.944 Billion that we know nothing about. The cost for SAS is bonkers. If they can't get the costs down SIGNIFICANTLY, I will be among the first to say that it needs to be cancelled. Anyway, it would be much better to accelerate CBTC, to fix bottlenecks like Nostrand, Astoria, etc.
  11. 3 points
    I can't believe you are getting flack for this. This guy should a Darwin award. How dumb do you have to be to flip off someone filming you in a brand new train, when you can fully expect it to get posted online 2 minutes later?! Geez, at least he should have tried to cover his face or something LOL. C'mon, of course people are going to film a brand new train! It's like if a T/O on the Holiday shopper train or TOMC got angry and flipped off someone filming them.
  12. 2 points
    Any think that they’ve decided to install CBTC in all the wrong places? Methinks CBTC should be added around where trains do a lot of switching, like: 145 Street to 103 Street () 72 Street to 42 Street–Port Authority Bus Terminal/47–50 Streets–Rockefeller Center () 49 Street to 23 Street () 57 Street to 42 Street–Bryant Park () West 4 Street–Washington Square to Delancey Street–Essex Street () York Street/Fulton Street to Carroll Street () 7 Avenue to Church Avenue () Prospect Avenue to 53 Street/9 Avenue () Manhattan Bridge to Atlantic Avenue–Barclays Center () West 4 Street–Washington Square to Fulton Street/World Trade Center () High Street to Clinton–Washington Avenues ()
  13. 2 points
    Assuming that "widening" means they are adding a fourth eastbound lane from Exit 3 to Exit 5 (Bay Parkway) on the Belt, all I can say is, it's about time. This will finally ease the endless traffic jam at the Verrazzano merge. On the other hand, the left exits are fine in my opinion, and replacing them with right exits isn't worth the effort or money at all. I don't really know what you would want to be done to the bike/pedestrian walkway. It's pretty good already, and having walked it, all I could really suggest is to add some lights to it, so it's not in total darkness at night.
  14. 2 points
    Latest news: -The Express Bus Advocacy Group is almost a year old with almost 1,600 members. -Express bus service is still a work in progress, but we've seen some improvements on a number of lines that had serious issues. -We've sent our Fair Fares petition to Governor Cuomo to reinstate the monthly pass, senior discount and student discount at all times. The petition garnered over 300 signatures and over 500 likes via social media.
  15. 2 points
    The bus doesn’t sound all too appealing as even the limited bus is the equivalent of a super-local. I’d rather take whatever train is nearest to me than go a little further for an express. For me, that’s going to be the or .
  16. 2 points
    If service along Fourth Avenue Express was increased, and with the mess at DeKalb fixed, a via West End Express wouldn't be bad at all. It would save a decent amount of time for riders. You just need enough local service. There is so much potential for increased service on Sixth Avenue Express! With deinterlining, get 30 TPH, with CBTC, you could get 33+, and with open gangways and 60 foot cars you can increase capacity further. Don't buy it when people say that the subway is at capacity.
  17. 2 points
    No offense, but a lot of the recommendations you’ve made have already been discussed and agreed upon ad nauseam on these forums. I can see some changes being impeded by costs, community opposition, or degree of difficulty. I’m of the opinion that efforts should be made to optimize the system in its current state first before exploring any extensions or new construction.
  18. 2 points
    This makes since being that Kingsbridge had a bed bug problem when the D60’s where around in the winter and Casey Stengel’s allotment did come from kingsbridge
  19. 1 point
    If wait times are increased but they run fewer buses, no matter the size, how is this better? If the ridership numbers remain the same all it adds up to is longer waits. The same amount of people are still being transported by my calculations. When it’s 20 degrees outside and Mr. Wind, aka the Hawk, is kicking butt I doubt if everyone will feel the same way you do. I never expected to see someone agreeing with a service cut , as per the Daily News article, on a transit advocacy forum. Just my opinion. Carry on.
  20. 1 point
    That bus lane is sorely needed for that particular rush hour, because that takes up a significant amount of run time on the express buses (AM is much smoother). Those buses crawl on that segment, which not only makes it less time competitive with the , but it also hurts reliability on other trips (if the buses DH back to Manhattan). Every minute saved counts, especially with how little time B.Os may have to get back to Manhattan to do another trip. I'd also argue that the bus lane should start at Flushing Avenue, but it is what it is.
  21. 1 point
    I guess no one wants to say how the first day of phase 1 went. Lol
  22. 1 point
    This isn't really that bad to me, I'm mainly talking about the exterior "damage" (the 5th pic to be exact). ENY has some buses like that and their maintenance is good..
  23. 1 point
    https://www.nytransitmuseum.org/programs/list/?tribe_paged=2&tribe_event_display=list The Fall 2019 list for the Brighton Parade of Trains: -BRT Elevated cars (Gate cars) -BRT/BMT Standards -R1/9 *There is a mixture of a pair from the Train of Many Colors and Metals: IRT R33/BMT R38 train = 4 cars
  24. 1 point
    @RR503 This is incredible. $4.7 BILLION will be in the Capital Program for Penn Station Access, in addition to the $895 Million in the 2015-19 Program. The whole advantage of the project is that it is using EXISTING rights-of-way, making use of EXISTING tracks. What the heck went wrong? I just can't..... All that is involved is some track work, substations, a bit of electrification, and new stations. UGH! https://www.lohud.com/story/news/2019/09/16/mtas-51-5-b-capital-plan-help-pay-penn-station-access/2341595001/
  25. 1 point
    The , folks can make a case for since the regular is all local and there are like 50 minutes in between Broadway–Lafayette Street and Coney Island–Stillwell Avenue. The is only slightly faster at 46 minutes, but it runs express. That alone is going to be a hurdle since the communities that stand to benefit have to make the case that the needs to be even more express than it already is. I’m not arguing against it since I believe the MTA should strive to make everyone’s commutes 35 minutes or less. But it’s an unlikely proposal that anyone would stick up for—especially from the MTA which would have to increase its expenditures to run trains for the . Anyway, I’ve taken the PM a third time today. Again, there was the overly enthusiastic conductor sprinkling his commentary on the passengers here and there. There is some extra information I noted for @Italianstallion. Whenever possible, I took note of the number of people in the train car with me (including myself). If I didn’t have a clear view down the length of the car though, I did not try to count. That was when the train was packed. (A Kings Highway-bound pulls in the station at 5:09 and leaves at 5:10—1~2 minutes late. The Coney Island-bound followed at 5:15.) Broadway–Lafayette Street: opened 5:15 (2 minutes late compared to scheduled 5:13) Broadway–Lafayette Street: closed 5:15 2 Avenue: opened 5:16 2 Avenue: closed 5:17 Delancey Street–Essex Street: opened 5:18 Delancey Street–Essex Street: closed 5:18 East Broadway: opened 5:20 (At this point, there are maybe a little under 80 people in the car. Most people are sitting, but there are about 3 dozen people standing.) East Broadway: closed 5:20 York Street: opened 5:22 (At this stop, more people than boarded the train than have gotten off.) York Street: closed 5:23 Jay Street–MeteoTech: opened 5:25 (3 minutes late compared to scheduled 5:22) (The across the platform doesn't wait. The picks up a few more people. At this point, there are about 80~90 people in the car.) Jay Street–MetroTech: closed 5:25 (The passed Bergen Street at 5:26.) (The passed Carroll Street at 5:27.) (The passed Smith–9 Street at 5:28, creeping slowly down the incline towards 4 Avenue–9 Street.) (The passed 4 Avenue–9 Street at 5:29~5:30.) 7 Avenue: opened 5:31 (2 minutes late compared to scheduled 5:29) (There were about 60 people remaining in the car.) 7 Avenue: closed 5:32 Church Avenue: opened 5:36 (3 minutes late compared to scheduled 5:33) (There are 56 people remaining in the car.) Church Avenue: closed 5:37 Ditmas Avenue: opened 5:38 (There are 58 people in the car—still SRO.) Ditmas Avenue: closed 5:39 18 Avenue: opened 5:40 (There are approximately 41 people remaining in the car—no longer SRO.) 18 Avenue: closed 5:40 Avenue I: opened 5:41 (There are 38 people remaining in the car.) Avenue I: closed 5:41 Bay Parkway: opened 5:42 (There are 40 people remaining in the car.) Bay Parkway: closed 5:43 (A Manhattan-bound passed by on the express track, probably to make up for lost time.) Avenue N: opened 5:44 (There are 34 people remaining in the car.) Avenue N: closed 5:44 Avenue P: opened 5:45 (There are still 34 people remaining in the car.) Avenue P: closed 5:45 Kings Highway: opened 5:47 (1 minute early compared to scheduled 5:48) (There are no trains on the middle track. There are 21 people remaining in the car.) Kings Highway: closed 5:47 Avenue U: opened 5:49 (There are still 21 people remaining in the car.) Avenue U: closed 5:49 Avenue X: opened 5:50 (There are 10 people remaining in the car.) Avenue X: closed 5:50 Neptune Avenue: opened 5:52 (There are 5 people remaining in the car.) Neptune Avenue: closed 5:53 West 8 Street: open 5:54 (There's a on the upper level already and another one at Ocean Parkway. It pulled out at 5:55 right after a Manhattan-bound arrived. The next from Ocean Parkway pulled into the station at 5:56 and pulled out a minute later at 5:57. On the , there were 3 people remaining in the car. The train didn’t close down until the Manhattan-bound pulled into the station at 6:00.) West 8 Street: closed 6:00 Coney Island–Stillwell Avenue: opened 6:03 (1 minute late when compared to scheduled 6:02) It was interesting to note that more people got on the train (from my point of view inside the train) than got off at York Street and Jay Street–MetroTech. I have to wonder if perhaps these people knew the that just passed was only going to Kings Highway and they wanted to wait for a Coney Island-bound instead. One trend that seemed to be holding was that the s made it into the terminal fairly promptly. Since the pattern has held nicely so far, I would advise going upstairs to take the once the reaches West 8 Street to save 5 minutes. Whatever train supervision is doing with the is working pretty well. That said, the ’s run time from Broadway–Lafayette Street was no less than 48 minutes in the past 3 days I’ve ridden it—averaging 50~51 minutes …which also happens to be exactly the same as the ’s scheduled run time! Nevertheless, it should save people 5 minutes in practice—even for those going to Coney Island–Stillwell Avenue, as long as one remembers to transfer to the upstairs at West 8 Street. Tomorrow, I’m going to give the AM another try. I haven’t ridden it since its debut day. I think that has more potential as it avoids the terminal woes that plague the PM . I don’t know if the MTA will change up the PM ’s schedule to fix it, but as it stands, it’s terribly managed.
  26. 1 point
    I don't think we should be obsessing about the express F being held just before entering Stillwell terminal, if it's on-time until that point. It still saves time as per schedule for every stop on the line EXCEPT Stillwell. Very few people are left on the train by that point, I suspect, and they're the ones who have the most choice of alternative routes.
  27. 1 point
    Today, for the : (The conductor was late and instead of the train closing down at 7:42 as indicated by the lights…) Coney Island–Stillwell Avenue: -7:43 West 8 Street: 7:45-7:46 Ocean Parkway: 7:47-7:47 (A Brighton Beach-bound dumped its passengers on the Manhattan-bound platform at the same time the pulled in. There was no train on the Coney Island-bound express track.) Brighton Beach: 7:48-7:49 Sheepshead Bay: 7:51-7:51 Neck Road: 7:52-7:53 Avenue U: 7:54-7:54 Kings Highway: 7:56-7:56 Avenue M: 7:57-5:58 Avenue J: 7:59-7:59 (A passes by the in between stations.) Avenue H: 8:01-8:01 Newkirk Plaza: 8:02-8:03 Cortelyou Road: 8:04-8:04 Beverly Road: 8:05-8:05 (The that passed the at this station at the same time yesterday already passed by at Avenue J today.) Church Avenue: 8:07-8:07 Parkside Avenue: 8:08-8:09 Prospect Park: 8:10-8:10 7 Avenue: 8:13-8:13 Atlantic Avenue–Barclays Center: 8:15-8:16 DeKalb Avenue: 8:18-8:20 (There was a half-minute delay because of holding for an arriving .) ( reached the junction at 8:22, with a on the other track going ahead first. The entire train made it on the bridge at 8:23 and reached the foot of the bridge at 8:26.) Canal Street: 8:28-8:28 (For the sake of completeness, I transferred to the which pulled in around the same time as the .) Canal Street: 8:28-8:29 Spring Street: 8:30-8:30 Bleecker Street: 8:31-8:31 (The from before appears to have just left the station. A Bronx-bound pulled into the station shortly after at 8:32.) I can conclude one thing from comparison with yesterday’s trip: there is a lot of variability in train departure times, and the mismatches create inefficiencies that make it not worthwhile to pursue a two-seat express ride; you’ll never know if you’ll make the connection. As a stark contrast, the difference in run time between yesterday and today’s ride to Broadway–Lafayette Street is a whopping 8~9 minutes, illustrating the potential of a one-seat express.
  28. 1 point
    Even if it is beneficial, it's hard to see it being worth spending a large portion of $1.13 billion. Even worse, as I said before, those ramp connections are almost brand new (built as part of the previous bridge rehab). So it's really not a good value.
  29. 1 point
    Let me illustrate my point using Canal St. A southbound entering there usually gets a short route into the station, but faces a red home signal at the leaving end of the platform. That red home does not indicate a conflict so much as it does a lack of an established route all the way through the interlocking; a train tripped by it would likely overshoot onto the local track without any issue. Aside from the weird approach locking time thing that happens north of the station, operators enter in these conditions as if everything were normal -- they may brake a bit more conservatively because they're facing a red, but they do not act as if they're entering a stub-end terminal. CBTC, however, would enforce that level of safety. If my understanding of NYCT CBTC architecture is correct, a stop arm is considered a fixed obstruction, and therefore becomes the endpoint for a safe braking curve which, in turn, forces trains to enter interlocking areas at restricted speed -- imagine the entering 8th Ave, or the entering Main.
  30. 1 point
    This was something I partly mentioned last week was to leave the M11 alone solely as the terminal. However, you also have the M14A there too. I’d leave it alone for late nights and daytime terminate at 23rd-Chelsea Piers. My personal gripe with Abington Sq is that you have so many buses there but the real service technically starts at 14th and 8th. I personally don’t think the other stops before 14th and 8th are utilized.
  31. 1 point
    Im iffy about a combined m12 cause it will get it's butt whipped And my concern about extending the m10 was to declutter Columbus
  32. 1 point
    Both the the AM and PM were SRO between Jay Street–MetroTech and 7 Avenue. A lot of passengers got off at 7 Avenue in the PM, heading for the station exits. I’m going to observe the loads more closely during the next few observations. But I wouldn’t say that either ride was packed during the express run. The PM I was on came right after an so it likely contributed to the lighter load. Unfortunately, that was signed up as Coney Island-bound but I never saw the train after Kings Highway, so whoever took that train not only got the slow ride through Brooklyn, but also had to wait for the next while the Coney Island-bound breezed past it at Carroll Street.
  33. 1 point
    For engineers and conductors? Not sure. They’re just going to keep hiring for now.
  34. 1 point
    Two aspects to this: 1) Left-hand exits are technically illegal under the Federal Highway Aid acts - as they’re not in spec for interstate highways, and each expenditure for roads with them have to be explicitly mentioned in law as grandfathered and eligible, and 2) They contribute to backups and cause wrecks - like left-hand entrances - because people cut across lanes to get to them - causing delays or wrecks that cause delays. Now if only NYCDOT could get money to get rid of the left entrances and abrupt lane shifts on the FDR (ie Under the UN/Rockefeller University)...
  35. 1 point
    From another site 5759 from A & C bus company is in like new condition in NJT colors at Ironbound. Not in service but looks ready.
  36. 1 point
    The S89 had an issue with the detour around the Bayonne Bridge construction so they gave some runs (especially the last run) MCIs/Prevosts There used to be some runs that did a piece on the S55/56/78 trippers and then an express piece, so those often used coach buses as well
  37. 1 point
  38. 1 point
    I wasn't able to answer you yesterday since I got too busy with other issues. My original plan for south of 63rd Street was for a second SAS service to use the line, running from Hanover to 55th Street, then along the 63rd Street Line, the Queens Bypass, and Rockaway Beach Branch to Far Rockaway with the . The line would supplement the from West Harlem to Queens, making express stops south of 55th Street (The would've ran local on this stretch) This was dropped due to logistical concerns of using both the Bypass line and the RBB together. I now have planned to create a short run operating between Hanover and 55th Street to provide frequent intra-corridor service to those who need it. There would be 5 short run trips every hour (in other words, a train every 12 minutes), for a total of a train every 2.4 minutes between Hanover and 55. Eventually, I do plan to convert those short runs into separate lines with separate schedules to provide better access. I will discuss that below. The problem with the Westchester Sq conversion into an express station is that while this would be ideal for the high passenger volume there, the structure may not support such a conversion. The structure would totally have to be rebuilt to do this, which can disrupt both vehicle and subway traffic while this goes on. Another idea I had in mind is to rebuild the Pelham Bay Park station into a configuration similar to Mets-Willets Point on the . Here, there is a side platform for the Manhattan-bound local trains and an island platform for the peak-direction express and the outbound local trains (a practice that is almost never followed). My proposal for Pelham Bay Park would involve having the middle track take the place of the island platform and the local track take the place of the side platform. On the former local track trackbed, an island platform would be constructed as well. While this proposal may be expensive and could also disrupt traffic, it would allow for faster service by skipping more stops. From here, the three tracks would continue to the three track Co-op City station, which will be built in a style similar to Main Street-Flushing. At this point, Pelham service would operate in a similar fashion to the Flushing Line, with both local and express service to the end of the line. Co-op City, like Flushing, does see high bus transfer volumes, and having both local and express trains go there would support the bus transfers. The bus lines themselves would see some restructuring to accommodate the shift in passenger volumes from Pelham Bay Park to Co-op City. I started thinking of a South 4th Street Subway because in addition to changing the from serving 6th Avenue to 8th Avenue, I was proposing a few other changes I did not include. For one, I was thinking of consolidation of stations on the Jamaica and Myrtle Avenue Elevateds, rebuilding the Myrtle Junction, etc. Those plans, combined with one of your suggestions of all and service over the bridge made me think "If I want to do all of this, I might as well make a whole new subway line while I'm at it. We have provisions for a Worth Street subway and that can feed into the new line." Form there, I would do the vanshnookenraggen plan and have 8th Avenue service serve thre Worth Street Line and reroute 6th Avenue express service to Williamsburg. More specifically, I am proposing a slightly-modified version of this: Credit goes to Vansnookenraggen by the way. From there, the World Trade Center station would be converted to a replacement location for the NY Transit Museum (hopefully no one threw away the old signs for the station), since I plan to use the Court Street station for the Fulton Local service. Aside from a more convenient location, the other advantage of the S 4th Street Subway on the museum is that the new WTC location would allow for a more convenient run off path to the 207th Street Yard, ending the need to reverse on the main line in the event that trains need to be swapped out. In addition, the Jamaica Avenue and Myrtle Avenue Elevated would then be torn down from Marcy Avenue to Broadway Junction, resulting in faster service to Midtown for these commuters. In addition, current bus service on Broadway (B46 and Q24) is unreliable due to traffic issues stemming from navigating under an elevated train. With the elevated gone, the bus line can operate more reliably since they no longer have to navigate the elevated train columns. Broadway bus service can be combined with bus service over the Williamsburg Bridge, forming a single bus line from Lower East Side to Broadway Junction to replace elevated train service. The only suggestion I am not taking is the choices you are giving me for the Fulton Local service. It appears you want me to choose between Second Avenue or Broadway service for Fulton Local, but not both. I just threw it in there to allow for both a SAS to Brooklyn and a a Broadway Line to Euclid Avenue, since the latter is to provide the a yard to be based at if the line were to be rerouted to Astoria (everyone's favorite proposal). When I initially planned these proposals, I was doing so with the intention of ending the need to schedule all of the B division around 59th Street (IND 8th Avenue). That one interlocking is so fundamental to operations that and service is scheduled backwards from it. While I would have the 63rd Street connection recreate 59th-8th, I was hoping that the would be scheduled independently of the and , compared to today, the would be scheduled around the , which in turn has to deal with the , and the and need to be scheduled around those lines, and they would have to deal with the and , etc. The merges that would occur under my plan (if we cut out the plan) would be at: 36th Street Van Wyck Blvd DeKalb Interlocking However, as a second though, a 8th-53rd connection would be ideal as well to deinterline QB if you want to. I only did it the way I planned it because I was under the impression with the 30 trains on the express track (15 for each service), 20 on the local tracks (10 for each service) branching out to 25 trains for each crossing (one express and one local each), and the fact that CBTC would increase track capacity to 40 trains, there would be a lot of more room for merging and diverging. 59th Street-Columbus Circle.
  39. 1 point
    All of the artic loaners to CS have returned to Grand Avenue.
  40. 1 point
  41. 1 point
  42. 1 point
    from 125 St/2 Av: 138 St-Grand Concourse Bronx Terminal Market Yankee Stadium runs via Ogden Av 166 St 170 St runs via University Av 175 St Tremont Av Burnside Av 183 St Fordham Rd Kingsbridge Rd Marble Hill Johnson Av/Kappock St 230 St/Riverdale Av 238 St/Riverdale Av 246 St/HHP Wave Hill-249 St from 125 St/2 Av: 125 St/Lex Av MNR 125 St/Lenox Av 125 St/St Nicholas Av 125 St/Bway Grant's Tomb (122 St/Riverside Dr)
  43. 1 point
    If there is a list, then so far there’s 232, 380, 428, and 442.
  44. 1 point
    It’s a fair response. We left and formed our own, NUHW (see post above), and SEIU-UHW got California and Fed courts to take every step to block recognition, and then UHW had nerve to abrogate their responsibilities to represent us and 50 of us got fired as an intimidation tactic. Thats why I support the simple vote (the card thing) to unionize - because when your union doesn’t bargain in your interest - thinking pay rises are the only thing you’re worried about, when your ability to do the job effectively and live your life is impeded by management with the union’s blessing, you should be able to leave it and start or join another. No doubt that if these employee’s could do that, some of these asinine anti-customer rules inflicted upon them would go away, and we’d probably have a better customer experience, and some budget savings.
  45. 1 point
    Reading is fundamental: "Other east Bronx bus routes that won’t be effected by the MTA redesign are the: Bx23, Bx26, Bx28 and Bx30."
  46. 1 point
    Monsey Trails trips from Borough Park run express to Rockland County after stopping in Williamsburg. They don't make Manhattan stops, or cater towards Manhattan commuters (there's a separate Manhattan service towards Rockland County).
  47. 1 point
    Not my photo, but it looks like the children were out there in full force this morning. Whether they went to school or not is another story.
  48. 1 point
    The dangers of typing quickly. Yes, that should read the on an 8 and on a 12. That's a total of 17.5 tph, or not enough space for the . I'm not sure if you're just trying to be clever or you actually don't think there's ridership that the agency drives away or does not receive because of poor service quality/design... If it's the latter, please consider all the non-MTA trips taken in this city, and all the trips that are simply not taken because of the MTA.
  49. 1 point
    Those XD60’s are there for maintenance
  50. 1 point
    CAB SIGNALING FOR THE R211S Screen Shot 2019-07-19 at 2.47.57 PM by Union Turnpike, on Flickr Screen Shot 2019-07-19 at 2.48.17 PM by Union Turnpike, on Flickr
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.