MTA Revises Service Cuts

[Zman]

http://www.mta.info/news/stories/?story=24

[lilbluefoxie]

Yessss the lives!!

[GojiMet86]

Wow. They actually are going to keep the . Well, someone's going to have to make an orange smiley. I prefer the .

[lilbluefoxie]

Im sure there will be plenty of older brown signs still around

[Zman]

The Greenport Scoot lives too, also the Freeport-Jones Beach N88 bus.

[GojiMet86]

Maybe instead of having either the or , they could have an orange .

[Zman]

Maybe instead of having either the or , they could have an orange .

 

The is jinxed.

[GojiMet86]

I've noticed on the "Report of all proposed service changes" http://www.mta.info/news/pdf/NYCT_Revised_Service_Changes.pdf

that there already is an orange . Page 12. That leaves one question: Who'd going to be the first to the ride it?

[2Line1291]

So now the isn't gonna die, I guess that's the end of the train (2001-2010).

[Nova RTS 9147]

Spending more money to change everything to an orange instead of just leaving it as the seems counter-intuitive to the whole saving money thing.....

[R42 M Train]

Yay!! The lives!!! Is it me or does the orange in the memo is a whole lot sexier than regular brown

[Shortline Bus]

IMO mergering the and is not the worse move ever by the IMO. I wonder when will Harry add the orange to this list lol?

 

Also guys i created a separte topic on the NYC Buses as well. Here link.

 

http://www.nyctransitforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18435

[Bill from Maspeth]

Yessss the lives!!

You are falling for TA Bull****.

 

All they are doing is thinking they're placating people who want to save the M route the way it is now. They're telling the public: "See, we're saving the M, all we're doing is rerouting it to Sixth Ave., we're not eliminating it". As far as the current V riders are concerned, NYCT tells them (except those at Second Ave.: same service, just a different letter designation". Of course, NYCT fails to tell them that they will get an 480' train vs. a 600' train. Now boarding locations at the ends of the platforms on the IND portion will be different and when the railroad goes down the toilet and all trains get overcrowded due to reroutes they will be packed in more.

 

I don't care if the M runs between CTL and MET, I don't care if the V runs between CTL and MET, I don't care what letter designation they use. I am still against this change. The West End line takes a hit, the Fourth Ave. line takes a hit, passengers in the rush using Flushing/Lormier/Hewes when the J/Z bypasses the station who want lower Manhattan also have to take an additional train just like riders between Met & Central will have to do.

 

They are making a big mistake. You supporters will see when you have massive crowd control problems at Essex/Delancey.

 

Mark my words.

[lilbluefoxie]

Well ideally, I would have rather they just kept the as is from 71 Av to 2 Ave, and the from Metropolitan ave to Broad St, let them cut <M> if they absolutely had to.

[Bill from Maspeth]

Well ideally, I would have rather they just kept the as is from 71 Av to 2 Ave, and the from Metropolitan ave to Broad St, let them cut <M> if they absolutely had to.

You don't get it, they can't turn 3 services at Broad St.!

 

The original plan, before the ill advised M/V "marriage" was to turn some trains at Chambers St. during the rush.

[lilbluefoxie]

You don't get it, they can't turn 3 services at Broad St.!

 

The original plan, before the ill advised M/V "marriage" was to turn some trains at Chambers St. during the rush.

 

Where does the midday end normally when its not doing the <M> to Bay Pkwy, if its chambers St, then its my mistake. What I meant was, have the do its midday pattern during rush hours as well and have it cut back on nights and weekends

[EE Broadway Local]

But Bill, I think Grand Concourse mentioned that it was being taken into consideration that the new would be an eight car 480 foot long train and that the M.T.A. is going by a station by station consideration between Broadway-Lafayette Street and Forest Hills-71st Avenue on where to stop the new train to minimize impact.

 

IIRC, the old (KK)/(K) service (1968-1976) between 57th Street-Sixth Avenue and 168th Street-Jamaica Terminal ("Broadway Junction" 1973-1976) started with six sixty foot cars (360 foot long train) then became eight sixty foot cars. Of course, the (KK)/(K) was essentially a rush hours service while the new will be 6:00am to 11:00pm

[NX Express]

Welcome the new !

[mark1447]

You are falling for TA Bull****.

 

All they are doing is thinking they're placating people who want to save the M route the way it is now. They're telling the public: "See, we're saving the M, all we're doing is rerouting it to Sixth Ave., we're not eliminating it". As far as the current V riders are concerned, NYCT tells them (except those at Second Ave.: same service, just a different letter designation". Of course, NYCT fails to tell them that they will get an 480' train vs. a 600' train. Now boarding locations at the ends of the platforms on the IND portion will be different and when the railroad goes down the toilet and all trains get overcrowded due to reroutes they will be packed in more.

 

I don't care if the M runs between CTL and MET, I don't care if the V runs between CTL and MET, I don't care what letter designation they use. I am still against this change. The West End line takes a hit, the Fourth Ave. line takes a hit, passengers in the rush using Flushing/Lormier/Hewes when the J/Z bypasses the station who want lower Manhattan also have to take an additional train just like riders between Met & Central will have to do.

 

They are making a big mistake. You supporters will see when you have massive crowd control problems at Essex/Delancey.

 

Mark my words.

Im gonna agree here.. Killing the via West ENd/4th Ave isnt a good idea.. Now the people living down there would now have to take the to the and to Canal or to Bway-Laffyette for Transfer..

 

Instead of just keeping the damn thing..

 

And causes people to stick to the center of platform from 71st to Bway, plus lead to more confusion for riders...

 

And ill cost a bit of $$$ to make these changes, including signs..

 

Wouldn't it cost the same to keep the Normal then to combine?

 

 

 

 

__________________________________

 

Where does the midday end normally when its not doing the <M> to Bay Pkwy, if its chambers St, then its my mistake. What I meant was, have the do its midday pattern during rush hours as well and have it cut back on nights and weekends

 

Midday ends at Chambers, RH at Bay Pkway, Evening at Broad St, Weekends at Myrtle bro

[Kingsbridge Bus]

Im sure there will be plenty of older brown signs still around

 

I hope there is

[Kamen Rider]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[mark1447]

why does the map in the PDF report show the South Brooklyn/Culver Express tunnel, but not the Christie Street Cut?

 

what are you talking about?

 

I guess t/a doesnt want people knowing what is the Christie Street Connection?

[LRG]

You are falling for TA Bull****.

 

All they are doing is thinking they're placating people who want to save the M route the way it is now. They're telling the public: "See, we're saving the M, all we're doing is rerouting it to Sixth Ave., we're not eliminating it". As far as the current V riders are concerned, NYCT tells them (except those at Second Ave.: same service, just a different letter designation". Of course, NYCT fails to tell them that they will get an 480' train vs. a 600' train. Now boarding locations at the ends of the platforms on the IND portion will be different and when the railroad goes down the toilet and all trains get overcrowded due to reroutes they will be packed in more.

 

I don't care if the M runs between CTL and MET, I don't care if the V runs between CTL and MET, I don't care what letter designation they use. I am still against this change. The West End line takes a hit, the Fourth Ave. line takes a hit, passengers in the rush using Flushing/Lormier/Hewes when the J/Z bypasses the station who want lower Manhattan also have to take an additional train just like riders between Met & Central will have to do.

 

They are making a big mistake. You supporters will see when you have massive crowd control problems at Essex/Delancey.

 

Mark my words.

 

It's a service cut, and people choose to be ignorant and not see it as such.

 

BfM nailed everything perfectly. I made a very similar post explaining in detail by the bullet how this service change would affect tens upon thousands of riders. It is a service cut, not an increase, not even an improvement. A C-U-T CUT! And the unused corridor will be unpopular just like how it was since the day it opened. It took the MTA ten years to learn that the cut was a huge waste to build because no one friggin' used the damn thing. And it'll be a failure shall it be implemented, watch and see.

[Kamen Rider]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[Brighton Local]

You are falling for TA Bull****.

 

. I am still against this change. The West End line takes a hit, the Fourth Ave. line takes a hit, passengers in the rush using Flushing/Lormier/Hewes when the J/Z bypasses the station who want lower Manhattan also have to take an additional train just like riders between Met & Central will have to do.

 

They are making a big mistake. You supporters will see when you have massive crowd control problems at Essex/Delancey.

 

Mark my words.

 

I agree 100%. As much as I would like to see Chrystie St re-opened, Lower Manhattan, 4 Av and the West End, needs the Train.. I oppose as well man..