BrooklynIRT

So..do you have any better cost-neutral ideas that might rectify the bunching problems of the ? Utica riders would likely make a much bigger deal if the did not stop there than if a 7th Ave Exp/EP Lcl did not stop there and Livonia would have service every 6 minutes while Nostrand would have it every 8 when Nostrand should have more service than Livonia, not vice-versa

RTOMan: Yep, I should have made that clear in the first post. Let it be known that I do not believe in or have ever believed in zero-recovery periods or other draconian labor rules and the zero-recovery thing was done only to simplify the calculations and nothing more. Again, I apologize sincerely to those who were offended by the confusion Again I know the service proposal is weird but the bunching up on the weekends is something that almost never stops..every weekend some train has an issue and trains are packed to the gills until the train gets to the Nostrand Ave line when they ain't supposed to be with the follower just 4 minutes away carrying significantly fewer pax when the headway is 12 You absolutely cannot cut the weekend or weekday at all. Too much ridership on Jerome. Very dense area

My fault. Was that the only reason comments were made about addresses and crew rooms? If that was the case then I do sincerely apologize to everybody for causing such commotion

This is in a large font only to get everybody's attention. I am not yelling. Actually I only discounted the recovery times to make the running time calculations easier. I did not mean that there would actually be no recovery time or negligible recovery time. Whatever recovery time there is now would mostly remain the same. My apologies if there was confusion there

148/145 riders would lose service, but they are closer to other lines than Nostrand Ave riders and those are two stops vs. six Nostrand stops (President does not count for all intents and purposes since it is right next to Nost/EP) that would have better service I understand the thing about flooding one line with service, but there should be a way to mitigate the effects of the bunching of the weekend

Hey, on the weekends when I ride the from JCT, half the car will empty out upon reaching Franklin due to the fact that almost half the pax want the And going back the other way a good number of people will transfer from the to the as well

More service to FB would be awesome but would cost money money money sir

I know that is happening this weekend I never said I would increase headways

Unless they put a pair of new turnouts by Nostrand JCT (which they are in no hurry to do ATM), trains actually would be crossing each other there since the would have to take the local track to stop at Nost and Kingston. MTA does unfortunately have a thing for using switches as little as possible; extra switch maintenance could be one added cost, low as it may be Q23, the whole point of this is to deal with the problems incurred when the does not show up for almost 20 minutes at times on the weekends

This is all discounting recovery periods and the reason for this proposal is to improve weekend service on the Nostrand Ave subway, particularly those times that the does not show up for almost 20 minutes, which is something I have noticed on several occasions. The stations along Eastern Pkwy and Livonia east of Franklin would also benefit, but 148 St-Lenox and 145 St along with the stops from 135 St to Franklin Ave would lose out (one less train per hour). Although, the are not all that crowded on the weekends, especially the 64 minutes = scheduled one-way running time for the weekend , 128 minutes, round-trip, assuming no recovery time 65 minutes = scheduled one-way running time for the weekend , 130 minutes, round-trip, assuming no recovery time from 148 to Flatbush every 15 minutes instead of 12: Rerouting it to Flatbush means a 5-minute decrease in running time in each direction, 10-minute decrease for a round, resulting in a 118-minute round trip. Currently 128/12 = 10.67 trains on the road, proposed 118/15 = 7.87 trains on the road, effectively 11 trains should be reduced to 8 from Woodlawn to New Lots, local Franklin to New Lots: 12-minute increase in running time in each direction for the Utica to New Lots section plus a 2-minute increase in running time in each direction since it would run local from Franklin to Utica, adds up to an extra 14 minutes one way, 28 minutes for a round trip, resulting in a 158-minute round trip. Currently 130/8 = 16.25 trains on the road, proposed 158/8 = 19.75 trains on the road, effectively 17 trains should be increased to 20. Since the lost 3 trains while the gained 3, this proposal should be cost-neutral Comments are welcome and anybody who thinks I am off my rocker for posting this can go on ahead and scoff until kingdom come (as has been done before), but it is pretty bad to wait 20 minutes for a train sometimes when the thing is supposed to show up every 12 minutes and I figured I would post this suggestion since others have been trying to figure out how to improve weekend CPW and QB service

Heh. That is one spooky stop with that fenced-off black cave near the south end of the SB platform. They should film Ghostbusters 3 or something there, base the story on "the creature from the black cave of the Flushing Ave IND station"

Also could those trying to reach Bedford between Fulton and Empire not just use the 48, which is coming back? And yes, for Bedford between Empire and Foster I think they should use the B44 or B41 and then walk over Bedford not having service may not be as problematic as points between Nostrand and Utica not having bidirectional north-south service because Bedford has buses on nearby blocks (admittedly those are some long distances to nearby blocks, but still) while the smallest gap between north-south buses in East FB would be that from New York to Utica and there are not even any trains east of Nostrand in that area

And yes, you were correct about BrooklynBus telling me that having the two directions of the route too far apart is not a good idea

I have a low opinion of the 34 and 79 SBS; this is why I do not feel 100% about them being announced For your other questions I would say it is case-by-case; no need to tell the people they can go to the IND at Penn Sta if it is a long block away and the connection can just be made at TSQ

If the 15 and 43 were to be left alone and only the 44 and 49 were changed as I described (49 via NY/Brooklyn Aves), it would mean that the 49 and 43 would both be running down Brooklyn. The lack of bus service on Marcy and Stuyvesant does not seem to be a big deal, but what about having two buses go down Brooklyn while none go down Albany? I once proposed a bus line that would run north on New York/Albany Aves and south on Albany, but I was told that having a bus go up one street and come back down on another street that is so far away is not a good idea; the two route directions should be kept as close together as possible. I know the M5 is one of those "super-loops," but I do not know the M5 too well to determine whether or not its being a "super-loop" is a problem In any case, if I could only change the 44 and 49, I would do this: NB 44 local via Rogers, NB 49 via New York from Foster or "D" to Fulton, SB 49 via Brooklyn from Atlantic to Empire or ENY Ave (little difference anyway), then via New York from Empire/ENY to "D" or Foster and then get over to Ocean -or- via Albany from Atlantic to Church, then via Brooklyn from Church to "D" or Foster and then get over to Ocean

Why?

How did the BMT put all its eggs in one basket?

Technically they should have announcements for any SBS line and any bus line going to an airport Now for my opinions: I think the 34 is crap, but it still has off-board fare collection; I am undecided as to whether it should be announced The 15 is decent, kinda sucky on 2nd Ave but good on 1st and they have announcements for it, this is appropriate IMO The 79 is fake SBS and should not have even been labeled as SBS to begin with; I would not agree with it being announced

Although it looks like it would be a win-win-win because all the 44s would be running on the same streets and would be able to just take a straight path between Fulton and JCT in both directions, the 49 would be the line going out of its way to serve NY/Brooklyn Aves instead of the 44 but would be better suited for this since it stops dead at Fulton instead of heading past it to Bridge Plaza, new connections could be made that are not currently possible, and it would put bus service on mad* blocks that currently lack it and are far from transportation (Stuyvesant, Albany, Marcy) *The use of that word in such a context is quite uncharacteristic of me, but it best expresses how enthused I am about this proposal. It seems so perfect..for now

Minor correction: -Southbound B49 replaces part of southbound B43 by being rerouted via Brooklyn Ave between Dean Atlantic and ENY Ave, runs southbound via NY Ave from ENY to "D" or Foster (bidirectional service on NY Ave between ENY and Foster or "D"), then gets back over to Ocean via either of those last two east-west streets Probably better to send the 49 down Atlantic to Brooklyn Ave as I just realized that the only reason the 49 uses Dean is to access the bidirectional part of Bedford, and it makes it much easier for people to transfer from the southbound B44 SBS

Bump A host of ideas to clean up the B44 SBS plan by allowing the B44 local to go up Rogers with the SBS: -Southbound B15 rerouted via Stuyvesant Ave between Broadway and Fulton St, via Schenectady between Fulton and Dean (uses Park Ave to get over to Broadway from Woodhull terminal like southbound B47) -Southbound B43 replaces southbound B15 along Marcus Garvey Blvd (Sumner Ave) by being rerouted via Sumner between Broadway and Fulton, via Albany Ave between Fulton and Empire -Northbound B44 local rerouted via Rogers between Flatbush and Dean, via Bedford north of Dean all the way to Flushing Ave (daytime) or Bridge Plaza (overnight) -Northbound B49 replaces northbound B44 local by being rerouted via NY Ave between Foster or "D" and Fulton, will still go over to Franklin Ave terminal like it does now -Southbound B49 replaces part of southbound B43 by being rerouted via Brooklyn Ave between Dean and ENY Ave, runs southbound via NY Ave from ENY to "D" or Foster (bidirectional service on NY Ave between ENY and Foster or "D"), then gets back over to Ocean via either of those last two east-west streets -B57 replaces other part of southbound B43 by being rerouted via Tompkins/Marcy Aves between Flushing Ave and Fulton St, terminates at Franklin/Fulton -That proposed DUMBO/Navy Yard line could replace part of the B57 by terminating at Woodhull This proposal leaves Court/Smith Sts and much of Bedford Ave without bus service, but East FB now has southbound service on a block other than Nostrand or Utica Ave. The only issue is that the B49 will need to be more frequent if it proves incapable of handling the loads along NY Ave at its current frequencies after the B44 SBS is created (and the B44 local is moved to Rogers with the SBS)

Thank you guys for sharing your knowledge. Ah yes, the guy on the left in this image.

So..is that BMT junction between DeKalb Ave and the Manhattan Bridge known as Gold St Junction, DeKalb Junction, or something else? Is the junction for the in Harlem known as 142 St Junction or something else? What is the name of the junction between 149-GC and 138-GC, if it has one? Also does anybody know if the junction outside 59-CC is called 56 St Junction, if it has a widely-known name? If you are saying now that the junction on the Brooklyn IRT is called Nostrand and not Rogers, that is a big revelation to me. Is the junction closer to Rogers Ave or Nostrand Ave?