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.

R68OnBroadway

Senior Member
  • Content Count

    932
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by R68OnBroadway

  1. I think cutting off the museum would probably be an idea not even Cuomo would go for considering the uproar from not only MTA employees and railfanners, but also preservationists and maybe even parents who often take their children there.
  2. Why is it that when there is express service on West End (unplanned reroutes), trains usually skip 25th and but stop at Bay 50th? Seems like a lazy excuse to randomly skip a stop given that there are switches at Bay Parkway...
  3. You’d take the trips and fold them into the (that’s what I meant). That should give you 12 TPH during the rush and you could then bump off peak service to 10. Doing this may increase runtime by 5 mins or so, but you’d be greatly benefiting riders and making it actually attractive. Keep in mind that the runtime increase would only affect Jamaica (and that would be countered by more frequent service). Richmond Hill, Woodhaven and the like would all benefit. I’d actually support killing skip stop in all cases; I only mentioned it with the Nassau-Bay Ridge service as you would have the designation left over after ending skip stop.
  4. In terms of designation, kill skip stop (which screws the with 6 TPH) and use the for Nassau-Bay Ridge.
  5. If only the stations weren’t in bad shape... cough cough *Norwood* cough cough
  6. I’m sure these same elected officials would be happy if they learned that service to 8th would see an increase and that there would be extra 6th service at Queensbridge. How is sending the via the local and lower Manhattan a “lesser evil”? The is often SRO before it even leaves Brighton while the Montague tubes see low ridership and the has seats available at DeKalb. The is also SRO so unless it gets double its frequency (which won’t happen since Concourse has terrible terminals; Norwood can maybe turn 15 and BPB 8), there is no way for those riders to not either get stuck with slower roundabout commutes or crowd the already crushloaded and/or have to make the long transfer to the .
  7. Which LIRR station has the lowest ridership? I'd imagine it would be on the Greenport branch.
  8. Looks like the won't be express until Thanksgiving then...
  9. I swear to god you never learn. Here are a few key points: The already merge at Rockefeller Center so it's not like anything changes. Downtown is not the center anymore. Brighton riders who want lower Manhattan already have a cross-platform transfer to the at DeKalb. Rerouting the via 63rd means you would send the to Astoria and run a " " from Forest Hills to WTC via QBL local/53rd/8th local. This would give all Queens stops west of Forest Hills a one-seat ride to both 6th Av and 8th Av (except Queens Plaza and Court Square) which could alleviate some crowding on the . I seriously doubt that 53rd will go to shit because of the elimination of 6th Av service. As for Queens Plaza you can take the (which would be sent there due to the ) or and walk the 6-7 blocks (or transfer to the at Lex-59). If that isn't good then take the to Grand Central for the .
  10. The key to preventing bus fare evasion is systems like OMNY (so it is easier to pay) and enforcement. For subways the key is not to add more enforcement but to design turnstiles that are hard to jump. The cost will recoup itself and would be considerably cheaper than the uninterested NYPD standing around all the time.
  11. So now we are screwing Brighton and giving the only line at DeKalb not maligned by merging a merge? The is shit with four (permanent) merges; this plan leaves us with 3 ( at DeKalb and 11th and the at Queens Plaza). The only good thing from this is that the DeKalb lines could get a TPH increase but that can be done better with dispatch trusting operators to use the punchboxes correctly (which they will). Doing this plan is a great way to crowd the and tank weekend Brighton ridership (which could be mitigated a bit by running the on weekends but it’ll suck like the because of all the flagging on CPW). It’s not that hard guys. This is how Broadway tracks correspond to their respective branches. 4th local-Montague-Bway local-60th-Astoria(QBL can also be added but I’d prefer shifting the to 63rd and adding a second service from WTC-Forest Hills to make the locals more attractive). Sea Beach-4th express-Bridge-Bway express-2nd. Astoria doesn’t need express service and is probably one of the few communities that would probably support getting local only service if it was more reliable. Brighton local-Bridge-Bway express-2nd. This is already in place and is great since it gives the UES an alternate route to Brooklyn that bypasses lower Manhattan and covers some of the areas the IRT is near (Flatbush Av and part of Nostrand.)
  12. I said the would run the same service pattern at all times (Astoria-Bay Ridge via Broadway local/Montague/4th local). As for the , it would still run via the local and Montague at night, but the would now run express on Broadway at night again.
  13. How much work would be needed to turn City Hall lower into a functional terminal? I know the platforms are only 480 ft, but the crossover is set back (you would only use the island platform as 3 tracks is overkill). Also, how many trains could you turn there? (You would probably only turn 6-8 though if you had 30 TPH on Broadway local.)
  14. If we go for an pattern with Broadway deinterlining, what service patterns do you guys think are best for each time? (Here are mine; rush hours, middays and evening are all put together into weekdays) 96-CI all times; late nights via Broadway local 96- CI all times; express in Manhattan all times Astoria- Bay Ridge (same pattern all times) Forest Hills- Whitehall/Canal, weekdays only same as today same as today WTC- Forest Hills via QBL local/53/8th local; weekdays only weekdays same pattern as today; weekends extended to Forest Hills; late nights to Essex
  15. Oh ok then lol. I thought you meant that to me since you quoted me.
  16. Am I missing something here? He (Wallyhorse) wrote that the would be the Broadway local to Astoria and didn’t say it would be rerouted via Montague so the I’m assuming it’s still via the bridge. This means the would have to switch from the express to local at Prince (which would just delay service like the 34th junction). That is in no way a reasonable plan.
  17. He said the would be local on Broadway yet stated the only merge would be between the and at the 11th St cut.
  18. Yeah, because Prince Street doesn’t exist... The amount of people who will turn trunks upside down to avoid a simple fix never ceases to amaze me...
  19. My god some people still don’t listen after the problems of an idea are explained...
  20. Is it more beneficial to run 53rd-Brooklyn service or CPW-Brooklyn service? Terminals dictate the former while potential line reliability issues dictate the later (if you were to also cut all CPW/8th local service back to WTC, you would probably also have to send the via CPW local and upper 8th/Concourse local while the run via the express to 207/Norwood.)
  21. I used to recall the sailing through the junction a few years ago (I had usually only taken the before this point) as it was the only train you could actually see Masstranscope from, but it seems to have slowed down to levels of crawling like the junction is the CBE.
  22. The only people who the really benefit are the Astoria-Lower Manhattan crowd, and eliminating the while sending the to 96th whole the goes to Astoria means that you still keep direct access for those people while still providing good service for the Midtown crowd (you would also be able to boost service given the elimination of the 34th merge provided you make some switch changes at Ditmars.) Also, I’ve seen a lot more people propose a Queens-8th exp-Brooklyn service. Would doing this be beneficial? You would eliminate the Canal merge (from what I know the Hoyt one isn’t as big as a problem), but is the 42nd merge any better? I think the best thing that would come out of it means that the gets a good terminal (Euclid) while the lower-use services ( ) would be fine with a 20 TPH terminal given that they are also supplemented by other lines.
  23. Any service that isn’t from 6th local via 63rd is a terrible idea as the doesn’t need another merge. (Don’t even say 60th as you would have just swapped the designations and killed the ’s reliability. Eliminating the could just be recouped by extra s to Astoria. The isn’t really an independent line anyways and I would probably only keep the designation to not confuse people about the short turn s to Whitehall.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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