RollOver

Yes it was... http://www.nyctransitforums.com/forums/topic/43732-r32-g-today/

No. Some R160s are out for CBTC work.

I mean really Javier, you're not being thoughtful at all with any of your recently posts in this thread. It makes me wonder if you take the subway regularly or you don't take the subway regularly at all. For starters, I'm not quite sure if either you yourself or a friend of yours is making these kinds of ideas, but I assume it's the former. If you want to make a good idea, you would have explain why you made your ideas the way you did as well as being logical and sensible about it. Instead of just simply posting them out of the blue. You can't send the to the Lexington Avenue Line permanently because the and already do the work and their combined frequencies is sufficient enough to handle the crowds. Also, there's no need for express service on the Jerome Avenue Line either, because trains would just carry almost nobody since the majority of the riders are headed towards the local stops from Manhattan or are coming from the local stops on their way to Manhattan. What would become of both Harlem-148 St and 145 St stations then? Not to mention the cannot handle all the stops on the West Side by itself, unless you boost the number of trains on the entire line that is, which I also don't think is necessary either. You can't cut the back to 14 St, because that would just delay trains trying to come through on the express tracks. They would have to be on the local tracks in order to get through 14 St. Why is that necessary? I mean you eliminate through service between Harlem and New Lots, and forced more and more people to transfer between trains trying to get to/from Brooklyn or the New Lots branch. Also, why should the 1/9 go to Brooklyn for? Is there an actual demand for it? A "one-seat" ride doesn't count, it's about demands and crowding. The runs very frequently enough to delay service at Chambers Street and the poorly built Rogers Junction as well as the not-too-good Flatbush, Utica and New Lots terminals. You already have the and doing the work between Lower Manhattan and the Brooklyn IRT. Why throw another line into the mix? Look at Rogers Junction, where trains are always being held to let another one cross infront of the other, most notably the and . As for express service on the upper Broadway-7th Avenue Line, that's not necessarily a bad idea, but you need to understand if there's an actual demand for it. Do people really need a faster commute to or from the area? Many people on the are only going a few stops. There's a reason why the 1/9 skip-stop was eliminated years ago, because it didn't save much time as it was local almost all of its route, as well as people only staying on the train for a few stops. As opposed to the J/Z skip-stop, where many people are on the train trying to get to Manhattan (and not a few stops). Again, you're not thinking any of this through. The point is to keep every line going to one destination from end to end and minimize confusion & delays, keeping things as simple to comprehend as possible. We've been clear numerous times about why the old was eliminated from South Brooklyn and Lower Manhattan and rerouted up to Midtown Manhattan and Queens Boulevard. It was to cut costs and many people from the West End Line are on their way to/from Midtown Manhattan and not Lower Manhattan. Why else do you think the Montague Street Tube sees the lowest amount of passengers than any other East River crossing in the entire subway system? If that wasn't the case, they would have never eliminated it, nor would they have eliminated the either and replaced it with the current . Also, slow speeds doesn't necessarily mean reroute some trains here and there, unless there is a major blockage in the area or capacity constraints. Do you ride the Queens Boulevard Line on weekends? Another thing: take a look at all the flagging with track/signal maintainers on every outdoor line during middays and weekends. Slow speeds, flagging, rail condition etc means that a train would be at most 15-20+ minutes late.

I think he made all that up, but whatever...

The is being sent to/from Chambers as always when it comes to disruptions on 6th Ave/Queens Blvd.

Never mind.

That makes no sense.

Via the from Queens Plaza to Canal Street, then via the (local or express) to whatever active terminal.

The Rockaway Line is my favorite part of the route. Beautiful looking stations, the ride on the Rockaway Flats is fast going 45-50 mph and the views across Jamaica Bay and the Rockaways. It's even more beautiful in the winter with the snow. I also like the busy Rockaway beach crowds. Yes.

Of course they don't.

Why do the and need another line in South Brooklyn to help them when it's been clear that the old had always light ridership? The and currently run 10 tph at rush hours anyway. The Fourth Avenue Local and West End lines have enough frequent service at rush hour. Whether trains arrive on time or not is a different story.

No they don't. They begin at Dyckman or 168. 59 St cannot be used as a terminal because of the .

Heh, I see you've completely contradicted yourself. But it's cool. It's not like neither you nor R62AR33/junjun gave any solid proof anyway. There aren't enough cars for a extension to/from Lefferts (and the reroute to the Rockaways in general) anyway. No such was the plan during the years between 2008 and 2010 since the was facing budget issues. Keep posting more misinformation and hearsays.

Don't play around, Daniel. You know what you yourself said. If the goes to Lefferts, then that means all 's goes to the Rockaways, no? Also, look at my edited previous post above. I think you misunderstood what Andrew was trying to call you out on.

You specifically said that there was a plan to extend the to Lefferts and reroute the to the Rockaways in 2011. That's what he was calling you out on. EDIT: You yourself know as well as Andrew and I do that the to/from Far Rockaway is the longest in the entire system and would have required a bit more cars than the run to/from Lefferts. The being extended to Lefferts would have also required a bit more cars. Why would there be such a plan back in 2008-2010? The was facing a ton of budget issues in those years.

That R62AR33/junjun guy is just posting misinformation as always just so he can sound knowledgeable. Ignore him. And where would those so-called 3-4 extra trainsets come from?

He means years/decades ago. It's called figurative language.

Yeah. That's also why I said that running a shuttle in Brooklyn is unnecessary. The would still be crowded anyway for all the reasons I've stated on the previous page, despite what Wallyhorse and Appa have been saying. The only people who would be on that shuttle are those trying to get to the Lex, and that leads to the problems described above this post. Not really much you can do much about overcrowding or whatever during this situations like this anyway.

Hmm right okay if you say so...anyway, 60 footers having more doors than 75 footers to keep dwell and boarding times down, as well as the also having more ridership than the does is the reason why the uses 60 footers only.

I've heard that fewer R160s are out for CBTC work. I may not be correct though, but this is what I heard. But even then, I don't see why either when the 's fleet is almost entirely SMEEs (14 trainsets of 8-car R32 and 6 trainsets of 8-car R42 cars). They have plenty of R32s and R42s from ENY yard to be use in service on the .

Been aware of that...I'm talking about car assignments, not service patterns.

It had nothing to do with power issues on the Flushing Line (I doubt there were power issues on the Flushing Line back then anyway), but that 142As are/were 10-car trains in sets of five at the time. So there was no pressing reason in sending them to the over the , as the former is 11-cars. But with the current R188 order, that has changed. Whatever. But I still don't believe you, as I don't know where the hell you're getting this from. Last I checked, Bloomberg has no control over which cars go where. That's for the itself to decide, not Bloomberg or railfans.

Alot more people are headed towards the Flatbush and New Lots branches than they are towards Utica. Utica is the busiest Brooklyn IRT station (aside from Borough Hall and Atlantic), but if you combined all 7 stations on the Flatbush branch, as well as all the 7 stations on the New Lots branch (including Nostrand and Kingston), the have heavier loads than the . The is heavy in the morning northbound from my experiences, but that's only because the high number of people going towards the Lex than 7th Ave. But either way, the Lex was affected and people trying to get from Brooklyn to the Lex still had to transfer like 2 times regardless of overcrowding anyway.

Nonsense. There are simple ways to handle situations like this one yesterday. The walk from the to the is shorter because all they have to do is just walk up the stairs and head straight at Atlantic (and I think Borough Hall too). All riders on Eastern Parkway still had service at every station, aside from the aforementioned issue with the Lex.