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.
Sign in to follow this  
EE Broadway Local

Should Other Subway Schedules Be Combined?

Recommended Posts

I've noticed the (F) and (V) trains share a schedule (paper and internet) and this has got me thinking: Should other subway schedules be combined where two trains share the same or parallel tracks in two or more boroughs?

 

I actually like the (F) and (V) shared schedule. It's good since the (F) and (V) share tracks between Lower East Side-Second Avenue and 47th-50th Streets-Rockerfeller Center and parallel tracks between Queens Plaza and Forest Hills (with a tiny exception where the (F) triangulates).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

(J) and (Z) share a timetable too, (Q) and <Q> used to. It makes sense when service is very very similar, and its companion route is a part time line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should definitely incorporate the Rockaway Park (S) shuttle's schedule into the (A) train's schedule, since it is in effect a part of the (A) running shorter trains. The Lefferts Boulevard late-night shuttle is already in the (A) schedule.

 

The Franklin Avenue shuttle doesn't quite fit into any schedule. The 42nd St shuttle should probably be squeezed into the (7)'s schedule, since its route overlaps with the (7) in Manhattan.

 

The (M) could perhaps be fit into the (J)(Z) schedules, since they run a common line for most of the (M)'s route, and on weekends and late nights the (M) is just a shuttle feeding into the (J) at Myrtle Avenue.

 

The (W) should definitely be folded into the same schedule as the (N).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The 42nd St shuttle should probably be squeezed into the (7)'s schedule, since its route overlaps with the (7) in Manhattan.

 

But they don't run on tracks that connect to each other. They're completely separated. I don't think it would work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(A) and (S) is already merged:

 

http://mta.info/nyct/service/pdf/tacur.pdf

 

Tho only in the map.. Same for (S):

 

http://mta.info/nyct/service/pdf/thcur.pdf

 

And wow they use (H) for the thcur name. tacur for (A)

 

 

They should definitely incorporate the Rockaway Park (S) shuttle's schedule into the (A) train's schedule, since it is in effect a part of the (A) running shorter trains. The Lefferts Boulevard late-night shuttle is already in the (A) schedule.

 

The Franklin Avenue shuttle doesn't quite fit into any schedule. The 42nd St shuttle should probably be squeezed into the (7)'s schedule, since its route overlaps with the (7) in Manhattan.

 

The (M) could perhaps be fit into the (J)(Z) schedules, since they run a common line for most of the (M)'s route, and on weekends and late nights the (M) is just a shuttle feeding into the (J) at Myrtle Avenue.

 

The (W) should definitely be folded into the same schedule as the (N).

 

 

@Luis (J)(Z)>> http://mta.info/nyct/service/pdf/tjcur.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But they don't run on tracks that connect to each other. They're completely separated. I don't think it would work.

 

Yea, but it's nice to see them paired on a scedule especially since the terminal is moving from tsq for the (7).

 

- A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yea, but it's nice to see them paired on a scedule especially since the terminal is moving from tsq for the (7).

 

- A

 

I still don't see the point. They don't share tracks, the cars don't even come from the same yard, and the point you just made shows that there's even less of a reason for them to share schedules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I still don't see the point. They don't share tracks, the cars don't even come from the same yard, and the point you just made shows that there's even less of a reason for them to share schedules.

 

Even tho they dont share tracks, they both make the same stops except 5th ave which is the Flushing line. Tho it could also be a waste of time and space.. Where would the (S) timetable be placed...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Even tho they dont share tracks, they both make the same stops except 5th ave which is the Flushing line. Tho it could also be a waste of time and space.. Where would the (S) timetable be placed...?

 

True true... does the (S) even need a schedule? It's just two stops.

 

What I'm saying is, they don't interline. The rest of the lines that have been mentioned in this thread do. If they don't interline, I don't see the point of having them share schedules. Look at the OP's original post, even.

 

where two trains share the same or parallel tracks

 

The (7) and (S) don't fall under this category.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If people want to get to GCT and not take a crowded (7) it'd be nice to know the (S) schedule. Same with the other direction.

 

- A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny that you mentioned, the (S) has its own: http://mta.info/nyct/service/pdf/t0cur.pdf

 

For only 2 stops? Please.... Its more of a 1-2 min wait, Around 10PM-12AM, like a 5min wait since Track 3 is used. When (7) isnt running due to a G/o, late nights its like 10-20min wait..

 

But anyways, does track have to cound for this? I mean, even if the line does the same stops?

 

 

True true... does the (S) even need a schedule? It's just two stops.

 

What I'm saying is, they don't interline. The rest of the lines that have been mentioned in this thread do. If they don't interline, I don't see the point of having them share schedules. Look at the OP's original post, even.

 

 

 

The (7) and (S) don't fall under this category.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If people want to get to GCT and not take a crowded (7) it'd be nice to know the (S) schedule. Same with the other direction.

 

- A

 

I've taken the (S) before. There's always a train in the station, at least on the GCT side. And the one that's packed is the next one leaving.

 

And because it's only two stops, the next train is never far away.

 

Perhaps it does merit its own schedule, but point still stands that they should not combine schedules. Plus the fact that there are so many trains leaving on both lines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only legit timetable merger I can think of is the (N)(W) because basically the (W) compliments the (N) in Queens and Manhattan, and goes to Lower Manhattan while the (N) goes on the bridge. When the (W) doesn't run, the (N) picks up the slack making local stops in Manhattan up to Canal Street. Late nights, it goes via the Whitehall St tunnel, making the (N) literally (W)'s normal route during late nights

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(:P(D)

 

They split up too far in Brooklyn. Now, when they only went to 34th, definitely yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The only legit timetable merger I can think of is the (N)(W) because basically the (W) compliments the (N) in Queens and Manhattan, and goes to Lower Manhattan while the (N) goes on the bridge. When the (W) doesn't run, the (N) picks up the slack making local stops in Manhattan up to Canal Street. Late nights, it goes via the Whitehall St tunnel, making the (N) literally (W)'s normal route during late nights

 

Plus, (W) was <N> in the early 80s according to my maps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They split up too far in Brooklyn. Now, when they only went to 34th, definitely yes.

 

I agree with you here. The (N) and the (W) sharing a terminal would make the greatest of sense since they basically serve the same number of stations, just like the (F) and the (V). Basically, a full-time line and a weekday line that share the common route for an extended period of time wold be best to have in one timetable instead of two. This is why I'm not too sure about putting the (A) and the (C) together. The (C) is a daytime line (all times except late nights) and I think there would be too much information to cram into one timetable for both the (A) and the (C).

 

Plus, (W) was <N> in the early 80s according to my maps

 

Except that the <N> back then ran only during rush hours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark1447, Metsfan & 7Line Fan: I only ever said the 42nd St (S) shuttle's schedule might possibly be squeezed into the (7). You don't have to take it so seriously.

 

I agree that since they don't interline it wouldn't make much sense, and while Metsfan's point about choosing one or the other is valid, hardly anyone ever consults timetables, especially for the 42nd St (S).

 

I would conclude that it's probably fine the way it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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