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.

LaGuardia Link N Tra

Senior Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by LaGuardia Link N Tra

  1. That's not entirely a bad thing if you think about it. -The main problem with an SAS-Williamsburg connection is the lack of connections that it'll have with the rest of the Network. Hence why the option is more favorable. - Now if Nassau Service were preserved under the to Willamsbrug Option, that'll allow the to dedicate all of its service into 4th Avenue Local (acting more or less as the primary line or supplementing the ) its a win win for everyone. - If Nassau Were abandoned, then here's what can happen: Broad Street and Fulton Center can become employee or storage Facilities Bowery could become some sort of layup or small maintenance Facility for the Williamsburg Service. Canal Street can be extended into a full on Mezzanine (with the exception of the former Northbound "Local" Track so that trains can transverse through if needed). Chambers Street could be converted into a Transit Museum given its grand size.
  2. There was a certain period of time where the website left it outdated to the point where you could view the train route.
  3. Question: Do you still have to pay $2.75 to ride on any SBS lines or no?
  4. This design choice is not new as other cities have BRT routes modeled similar to this. I’d like to see how this’ll go. Also, I think Hillside Avenue should adapt this model of bus lanes given its high amount of bus trafffic.
  5. While I like this idea, I'm trying to put the math together in my head. Currently (under pre-Covid circumstances), the runs 8 TPH during Rush Hours, while the and evenly split 12 TPH in half. (6 and 6 ). Not only that but the Williamsburg Bridge is capped at a Capacity of 24 TPH due to the Signals and the slow curves on each end of the bridge that lead to Essex and Marcy. So under your idea, I assume that the , and would have to have their service levels adjusted as to maintain the overall service level between Myrtle and Essex? In other words, you'd have 8 's to Broadway Junction, 6 's to Middle Village, and 10 's covering the whole line between Jamaica Center and Broad Street. Even though I support this idea, no matter how I look at it, there would be a service cut east of Broadway Junction during skip-stop hours, maybe I have to process it a bit more. But then again, I see a fair trade off here.
  6. I misunderstood this post for a minute for having trains run express between Myrtle and Marcy (that would be hell btw), but having trains run to Middle Village would force it to become a full time route, I could back that if it weren't for the fact that Ridgewood has demand for midtown service already. (And they're also want to keep the logo in their area like how Inwood would get salty if you replaced the with some other line). TBH, the should pilot this to see how well it can do, but that'll be dependent on rebuilding Myrtle Junction so that Middle Village bound trains don't cut in front of Peak Express trains. But given that this thread is about the facing another financial crisis, this won't happen anytime soon.
  7. Don't know about everyone else in the city but those here in the forum aren't okay with it. But since you bring up that fact that there isn't a criteria or timeline from the to bring back overnight service begs to ask the question, "Why is there no timeline or phased plan to resume Overnight service in the ? Is it because there's no plan or is it a ploy to eliminate overnight service?" Saying that you have an intention to bring back overnight service does not let anyone know anything meaningful, on the contrary, if Mrs. Feinberg said something along the lines of bringing back overnight service, then following up with some sort of phased plan to bring back overnight service would've been a lot more insightful for New Yorkers.
  8. A and Elimination is something I've low key predicted for some time, though I still doubt that'll happen. Overnight service, I'd like to see it return, but if there was a partial elimination, at least keep the high ridership lines running such as the Also, (if I recall correctly) the Nostrand Avenue entrance/exit reopening was a community funded project so I think that'll still happen.
  9. It’s only going to be between 57th and ..I believe 34th Street, I have to double check. Also, does anyone have any insight on whether or not the 5th Avenue busway is going to make the Street a two way street in the section that it’s being implemented in or no?
  10. The part of the article where it says how the refused to point out what it’ll take to restore overnight service tells me one of 2 things: 1) The does not have any comprehensive plan to restore overnight service 2) Like everyone else here said; a ploy to end overnight service. But if the really wants to get rid of overnight service, then it’s high time that they start investing in programs like FASTRACK again, maybe even expand the program since ridership is still ....relatively low.
  11. You can say that again! [The part I put in bold] To be honest, I wonder where the incentive for the QT65 proposal came from.
  12. Oh s*** I just realized that this account is one of my friends. I just told him about this and his was laughing his ass off. I barely use twiter nowadays so I don't really know much of what happens there anymore
  13. OHHHH, I read the posts in the Fleet Swap Thread cause I've haven't been active these past few days and whatnot. Oh, that guy needs to chill, I remember I had to put up with his crap in the Random Thoughts thread a year ago when somebody mentioned deinterlining. Nothing wrong with having different opinions or if people get a set of information that's different from what other people have. The actual problem kicks in when people don't know how to agree to disagree. Seems like the user (not gonna mention their name) got butthurt over the fact that people didn't agree with them or called them out on something that wasn't correct. Also, you don't need reading classes to learn simple grammar when you can learn that in your own time. Here are the definition's of fact and opinion for those who don't understand: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fact https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/opinion WIth that out of the way, I'm going to go back to doing my schoolwork.
  14. Hmmm. Seeing that the PATH to Alphabet City idea wasn’t a good one, I’ll disregard it due to the problems that you all stated that my idea had. This is actually a pretty good way to better serve NJ, though I’m curious as to why you chose 57th Street over 50th or 48th. Could it be that 57th happens to be a major corridor in Manhattan and that it also has the potential to extend the PATH out into Queens?
  15. Not sure if this would count as a subway proposal but how about using the PATH to serve Alphabet City? It could turn on 9th Street as there's a provision there for the PATH to turn. The stops could be the following: - Astor Place (connection with the and - 2nd or 1st Avenue. - Avenue B (Could be a 3 or 4 track Platform for a Brooklyn extension) (Swing Down Avenue C) - 6th Street? - Houston Street - Grand Street - East Broadway (connection to the ) and terminate. The Sole purpose of this extension is to serve the Alphabet City because its clear that SAS won't be able to do it)
  16. So judging by this, we only have today (and possibly tomorrow) to catch the 160's on the and 32's on the (if that's running)?
  17. I'd say yes. Though I'd do this a bit differently: 18 ; 12 via 53rd. 6 TPH worth of Trains will run Express to 179th along with these Trains in Question. 8 TPH worth of Service should run full time via 63rd with 6-7 TPH worth of trains that'll run local in Queens and as 's in Brooklyn.
  18. If I recall correctly, it was around January-March? of 2019, so over a year and a half ago. Last time I fanned a 160 was at Euclid. The train was aboutta start its run then all of a sudden, the emergency brakes were pulled. From what I remember, I hear it was a bunch of high school freshmen that pulled the emergency brakes. Never really cared to find out as I was there with a few friends at the time.
  19. No, though I did receive a picture in a messenger GC of a 160 on the headed uptown from Utica right now. Anyone here can shed light if you wish to.
  20. In terms of Speculation, I think that those extra 2-3 TPH will go to the . Mainly because of the Culver Express Service pattern and what not.
  21. This is amazing with what you're group is doing. I'm going to ask a few questions that I can think of right off the bat, I'll let you know when I have more,. (which I'll also ask on Facebook): - How do you plan to obtain the Rolling Stock for this private Express Bus Service? - Out of Curiosity, do express bus riders make bus > subway transfer (and vice versa), how would that work under this private service? - Not that this question in particular concerns me or anything, but "What would be the average salary of these private bus operators?" That's all I have for now, keep up the great work!
  22. If I’m not mistaken, the LIRR trackage turns on 2nd Avenue on 63rd Street and and then around 55th it 57th Street, the LIRR tracks are beneath the Existing Metro North Tracks. These tracks are also going beneath the 60th Street tubes and Lexington. My only reference as to how I know this is the track map that Vanshnookenraggen made some time back: https://www.vanshnookenraggen.com/_index/docs/NYC_full_trackmap.pdf
  • Create New...

Important Information

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