Jump to content

j express

Veteran Member
  • Posts

    1,047
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by j express

  1. I'll bet on this one:

    No (2) trains at all, with (3) trains running only to 14th Street from 148th or maybe even 137th. (5) trains run between 241st and Flatbush via Lex every 8 minutes.

     

    They'll have the Dyre line closed down, the Lenox line closed down, and the Clark tubes all closed down in one fell swoop.  :lol:

    If they shut down Lenox Av and Clark St, they will probably suspend the  (2)  (3) all together and run additonal  (1)s between 137 St or 96 St to South Ferry. I wont be surprised if the  (2)  (3)s that end at 96 St before the G.O started would be used on the  (1) . If so R142 on the  (1)

  2. @ShadeJay: Figures. The (Q) should really have the 68s while the (N) and (W) run 160s. There are too many instances where a (W) has run with (N) signage and vice-versa as of late. Keeping the 68s on the (Q) would eliminate this problem as there's only one terminal for the line.

     

    @NewFlyer230: All apps updated for the 11/06 service changes that use the MTA metadata show the (N) and (Q) runs to Lexington Av-63 St.

     

    As for the December opening, I'm not holding my breath. Until I start seeing the press releases on the opening date, I will not believe they'll be able to stick to the so-called New Year's Eve opening date.

     

    Regarding the planned extension to Harlem, while I'd like to see the line open without another decade-long wait, I don't see that happening. Even with the already built portions dug out, there's still a lot of boring that needs to be done to reach 125th Street, with the most difficult portion being the area around the Lexington Ave line and the Park Ave railroad viaduct. Then there's the issue of actually building the stations and all that entails with the project. We're more likely to see the (Q) extended to Harlem sometime by the mid-2020s at the earliest and that's only if the project starts soon.

    Its easier to put R68/As on the  (N)  (W) than on the  (Q) since the  (N) line runs right next to the C.I shop in which the spares are stored. If you notice the (B)    (Q)  (D) putins are often stored at Stillwell yard since its easier to do a deadhead from there to and from C.I. There are some  (B)  (Q) putins that come from the C.I Yard though. Most of the  (N) putins are stored at the C.I yard along with the 3  (W) putins. Thats why even before the  (W) came back there were much more daily occurences of R68/As on the  (N) than the  (Q).

  3. I see late night  (5) ridership is very low with the shuttle operating 5 car trains. I can see in the future that the late night (5) service would go to 149 St-GC.   (R) shuttle ridership is high compared to the other late night shuttles from what I see since you still have a good amount of people going to Bay Ridge during the overnight hours with a lot of the riders transferring to/from from the  (D)  (N). Having the  (R) go to Whitehall St is beneficial. 

  4. They have the (2) train running on 8 minute headways today. Sure it's not running to the Bronx and it's still considered a service cut when you factor in the (3) not running (combined 6 minute headway), but they don't normally adjust headways for the better for weekend G.O.'s.

    They want Lexington and 7 Av corridors to have at least 15 tph per hour on weekends minimum. Since the  (3) isnt running, they beefed  (2) service so 7 Av has 15tph. 

  5. The R143s dont need to be on the  (L) all time. They are similar to the CBTC R160s. Putting R143s on the  (J) provide more felxibity and its easier not to have restrictions on the fleet. If the  (L) uses up most of the CBTC R160s and the  (J)  (Z) need a train and R143s are available. They will put them on  (J)  (Z) .

  6. The (1) between 96th and South Ferry only uses 10 trains? I thought the number would be much higher...

    About 11 trains. To increase recovery time. The shorter the route and the travel time, the less trains are needed while the longer the route or the travel time, more trains are needed. This is if the headway is the same. 

  7. Question; let's say that the 1 has a G.O that cuts off access to 207th and 240th Street yards, and is only able to run up to 137th Street. The (2) lets the (1) borrow some of its R142 fleet (the (3) is also suspended in this case, as well as the (4) .) Does that mean R142's can now stop at SFL since crews that are from the (1) are operating the (2) fleets?

    Usually when the  (1) get cut back to 137 St, it dosent borrow trains since 137 St yard is sufficient to cover the  (1). 137 St layup tracks can hold 10 trains. If its running only between 96 Street and South Ferry, there is a small chance that an R62 from Lenox may be put into  (1) service since Lenox yard is the nearest to the  (1) line and the  (3) dosent use all of its trains on weekends. 

  8. Usually split G.O.s (where the line runs in two sections)

     

    I distinctly remember the R62A (4), R142A (2), R62A (3), etc. during a split G.O. that only happened because the portion of the route that it was running on had limited access to its yard. 

    Its noticeable in the IRT but not for the BMT. One case I can think of was a  (D) used a  (B) layup when it ran to 2 Av making all local stops.

  9. Right about the (1) transfer as that is the more important, plus we don't know if the Metro North station will ever be built anyway.

     

    As for 8th Avenue/CPW (or there, St. Nicholas Avenue), that is a connection that could prove very well needed, especially if work needed to be done on CPW where the (A)(C) and (D) needed to be switched to the SAS (the (B) would rarely if at all come up in this), plus as noted also allow there to be special SAS service to Yankee Stadium for events there.

    How would the  (A)  (C) get back to its regular routes if rerouted to Second Av thats just absurb. While the  (D) can resume regular route at 47-50 St. 

    Having the (Q) run to West Harlem is pretty pointless if you ask me. Who's going to ride the (Q) from W 125th Street, down the east side and back over to the west side when they have much quicker options via Broadway-7th Ave and Central Park West-8th Ave? If you must have a 125th Street crosstown, let it be serviced by the true 2nd Avenue line trains, rather than have the Broadway trains bounce back and forth across the island.

     

    I don't know why you keep mentioning elevated lines like there's any possibility of the MTA building one ever. Also, what the purpose behind a tunnel under 79th Street? I presume it's to connect to Queens Blvd, but why? 63rd Street is underutilized as it is. What do think is going to happen with another tunnel with limited connections?

    Even though it benefits Upper Manhattan riders to get easy access to the East Side, no one in the right mind would take a  (Q) to Midtown from 125 St when you have  (A)  (D) which is straight and a 8 minute ride on express. 

  10. No because most times when the (N) goes via West End either Both Directions or just northbound, the (R) Shuttle would most times stop at 45th Street and 53rd Street both ways. It's been the practice for years and it has happened when there's no G.Os on 4th Avenue.

    Also the headways on the  (N) and  (R) shuttle respectively are every 20 minutes overnight so it wouldn't be an issue. 

  11. (A)  (C) extension to Queens.

    4 track extension to Springfield Blvs via Piktin Av and Linden Blvd. 

    1, 76 St. Local  (C) stop

    2, Sutter Av. Local  (C) stop

    3, Cross Bay Blvd.  (A)  (C) stop.

    Track connection to Rockaways line after Cross Bay Blvd. 

    4, Lefferts Blvd  (A)  (C) stop. 

    5, Van Wyck Expressway  (C) stop.

    6, 147 St  (C) stop.

    7, Guy R Brewer Blvd  (A)  (C) stop. Transfer to the  (E) train .

    8, St Albans Stop  (C) stop.

    9, 198 St  (C) stop.

    10, Springfield Blvd  (A)  (C) stop. Bi level terminal.

    More proposals to come.

  12. (1) extension to City line. 

    New Stops: 

    1, 254 St. 

    2, 261 St. 

    Two tracked line. 

    (2)  (5) extension to Voorhes Av via Nostrand Av

    New Stops: 

    1,Av K. 

    2,Kings Highway.

    3, Av R.

    4, Av W.

    5, Voorhes Av. 

    Two track elevated till the south of Av W where three tracks till Voorhes Av which will be a three tracks terminal.

    (4) extension to Spring Creek.

    New Stops:

    1,Linden Blvd. 

    2, Vandaila Av. 

    Uses the existing New Lots yard rightway till Stanley Av then two track elevated to Vandaila Av.

    (3) extension to Kings Plaza via Utica Av

    New Stops:

    1,Rutland Rd. 

    2, Church Av.

    3, Kings Highway.

    4, Av M.

    5, Fillmore Av

    6, Av U.

    Three track line with a center platform at Kings Highway till Av U which is a two track terminal. Underground till Church Av and elevated to Av U.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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