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.


Veteran Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

795 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

1,579 profile views
  1. Stop lying. You know as well as the rest of us that the Woodhaven Boulevard buses run a lot more frequently than every 30 minutes for all but the wee hours of the night. Here I won't accuse you of lying, because I believe that you're truly convinced that your approach is balanced. It isn't. At all. But you truly believe it is. So here you're not lying. You're just wrong.
  2. I was responding to your most recent post, in which you wrote, "10,000 rides may be streching it. But l;ast summer I cam epretty close to 8,000 swipes per month." So I worked with your revised number of 8,000. It's physically impossible. And if you told us now that the actual number was half that, guess what - it's still physically impossible. If you want to say you ride lots of trains and buses, say you ride lots of trains and buses. Don't make up numbers that can't possibly be truthful.
  3. That's 258 swipes per day, or close to 11 swipes per hour, 24/7. That means you're swiping your MetroCard an average of every 5-6 minutes, day and night. Or perhaps you sleep on occasion. If you set aside 8 hours per day for sleep and other bodily needs (bathroom, food, etc.), you're up to 16 swipes per hour, or one swipe every 3-4 minutes. Physically impossible. Who do you think you're kidding?
  4. http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/11/why-dont-we-know-where-all-the-trains-are/415152/
  5. It's not on the back burner. It's a massively complex project that doesn't happen overnight. http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/pdf/151026_1345_CPOC.pdf#page=49
  6. Read itmaybeokay's post again. The primary challenge isn't in hanging the physical electronic signs - it's in obtaining the information that is fed to those signs. Which is the same information that you want fed to an app. Without the information to feed to the countdown clocks, there's no information to feed to an app, either. Once that information is available, if the physical countdown clocks aren't ready then certainly the app should come first.
  7. More info: http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/pdf/151026_1030_transit-bus.pdf#page=131
  8. If not the Rockaways, then where do you claim the former-Lefferts A's would have gone? If "Lefferts riders complained that they wanted their one seat Express Ride to Manhattan" (your words) then Lefferts riders were aware of a proposal to take away their express ride. How did they become aware of said alleged proposal, and how did you become aware of their alleged complaints? Hammels Wye to Far Rockaway is almost twice the distance of Hammels Wye to Rockaway Park. In the PM rush, the scheduled running time is 10-11 minutes from Broad Channel to Rockaway Park and 14-15 minutes from Broad Channel to Far Rockaway.
  9. The A to the Rockaways is a much longer run than the A to Lefferts. Running all A's to the Rockaways would require significantly more cars and more crews than the current split service. Where would those cars have come from and why on earth would NYCT have proposed a major service increase during a budget crisis? Lots of stuff that has no basis in fact is mentioned here by employees. If this alleged proposal made it to the local communities, it also undoubtedly made it into the press. Can you find me one single link to an article, anywhere, regarding this alleged proposal and the alleged community uproar that followed?
  10. Even if changing the order were as simple as you make it out to be (it isn't, because A cars are more expensive than B cars), you've just replaced an order for 36.5 trains with an order for 31 trains. How do you make up for the shortfall of 5.5 trains? The A and C don't share any terminals. There's no operational advantage to sharing a fleet. The 2 and 5 (effectively) share a fleet because southbound 2's often become northbound 5's and southbound 5's often become northbound 2's at the shared Flatbush Avenue terminal.
  11. Complete and utter nonsense. The R142's are in 5 car sets, and the 7 runs 11 car trains. A 30 tph test was run one day in 2002 on the 7, to see if the line could get by with 10 car trains running more frequently. The test failed. So the R142's, as initially configured, couldn't go to the 7. If you are seriously claiming that, one year after a major round of service cuts, NYCT was proposing to implement a major service boost in Rockaway service, then surely you can provide links to documentation of said proposal and of the alleged complaints. Incidentally, both the A and the C would have required many more cars for this service plan - where would these cars have come from?
  12. There were never ADA elevators at this station. When the 2/5 platforms first opened in 1905, these elevators were how people got into and out of the station, much like the Washington Heights elevators of similar vintage. I may be wrong about this, but I suspect they were closed when the Jerome line came through in 1918. As a major transfer point, I think it should have been on the list of key stations developed in the 1980's. But it wasn't included, and instead the station one stop up on either line was. I don't know why. Meanwhile, there are still stations on the list that aren't accessible that, per the original agreement, must be made accessible by 2020. Until the 100 key stations are completed, I guarantee that no resources are going to be spent on adding new elevators here. What happens after 2020? I don't know what's planned, if anything yet, but given the passenger volumes here, I think this would be a good station to get major access improvements, with some an enlarged mezzanine primarily serving the 4 and a separate entrance bypassing the 4 entirely to reach the 2/5 mezzanine. Full ADA would, of course, be a component. If that's not on the table, I'm not sure it makes sense to try to shoehorn in ADA here. Remember, there's an ADA station one stop away on either line here (in either direction, in the case of the 2). For the price tag of ADA at a complex station like this one, the MTA could instead install elevators at multiple stations that are nowhere near other ADA stations.
  13. 15 tph, actually - and those trains are pretty crowded (89% of capacity). Cutting service in half would bring that up to an absolutely untenable 178% of capacity. (Even the Lex express is "only" at 104% of capacity.) http://newyorkyimby.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/amcrowding.jpg It's impossible to determine based on station entries how crowded a line is during the peak hour, since it's impossible to tell how many swipes are during the peak hour, how far any individual is traveling (if isn't past the peak load point, he doesn't contribute to the peak load), which direction any individual is traveling (if it is against the peak direction, he doesn't contribute to the peak load). And in addition to ignoring Queensboro Plaza, you're also ignoring the many Flushing line riders who transfer there to the N/Q. See the link above for the numbers you want. The N and Q combined out of Queens carry 19,767 people during the peak hour, on 15 trains. The D and N combined out of Brooklyn carry 19,260 people during the peak hour, on 20 trains. Since, if I'm not mistaken, the West End is somewhat more popular than the Sea Beach, that leaves the Astoria with more than twice the ridership of the Sea Beach but with only 50% more service - and you're suggesting that the Sea Beach should have more service at the expense of the Astoria? No. Why would it be any more of a "nightmare" than to have those same exact trains share trackage along 60th Street? I agree that the N will probably resume running express once the W (or whatever it's called) comes back, but that's a function of what's most useful for the riders, not what the tracks or signals can handle.

  • Create New...

Important Information

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