T to Dyre Avenue Posted June 27, 2010 Share #126 Posted June 27, 2010 It depends on where they have the trains stop on each platform. Hopefully, they don't have the same situation they did in November/December 2008 when they ran R40s and R42s on the and you had lots of people running to catch the trains. That didn't last last too long and mixed R32/R38 trains were put back on the . But if that does become a problem with the , or if the via 6th Avenue turns out to be a lot more popular than many of us think it will, then the is going to have to seriously consider running 9-car trains of R160s and lengthening Metropolitan Avenue to handle them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted June 27, 2010 Share #127 Posted June 27, 2010 I'm proudly part of the group that is wholly indifferent to the . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INDman Posted June 27, 2010 Share #128 Posted June 27, 2010 I'm proudly part of the group that is wholly indifferent to the . Thats cause you live on Wrong Island and take the Fail Road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INDman Posted June 27, 2010 Share #129 Posted June 27, 2010 It depends on where they have the trains stop on each platform. Hopefully, they don't have the same situation they did in November/December 2008 when they ran R40s and R42s on the and you had lots of people running to catch the trains. That didn't last last too long and mixed R32/R38 trains were put back on the . But if that does become a problem with the , or if the via 6th Avenue turns out to be a lot more popular than many of us think it will, then the is going to have to seriously consider running 9-car trains of R160s and lengthening Metropolitan Avenue to handle them. You would have to do all the math on that. It would be a waste if you had left over cars that could not operate because their mates were taken away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ridgewoodian Posted June 27, 2010 Share #130 Posted June 27, 2010 Yesterday I an other people saw the ENY R160's going to Layup and its a BIG ASS GAP I didn't know 120ft was a lot,I was like whoa a lot of people are gonna bust their ass running for that .That is crazy and an ultimate fail. Really, I don't see this being a HUGE problem, at least not for regular riders. This is the city that practically invented pre-walking; I don't see it taking more than a couple of days for regulars to figure out where they should be waiting for their train. But if that does become a problem with the , or if the via 6th Avenue turns out to be a lot more popular than many of us think it will, then the is going to have to seriously consider running 9-car trains of R160s and lengthening Metropolitan Avenue to handle them. I that even possible? I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure that there are stations up and down the line in Brooklyn and Queens that couldn't take the extra car and that it would be hugely expensive to extend. (If it was JUST Metropolitan it would probably be fairly easy to do an extension.) Feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted June 27, 2010 Share #131 Posted June 27, 2010 It depends on where they have the trains stop on each platform. Hopefully, they don't have the same situation they did in November/December 2008 when they ran R40s and R42s on the and you had lots of people running to catch the trains. That didn't last last too long and mixed R32/R38 trains were put back on the . But if that does become a problem with the , or if the via 6th Avenue turns out to be a lot more popular than many of us think it will, then the is going to have to seriously consider running 9-car trains of R160s and lengthening Metropolitan Avenue to handle them. They should just rebuild the tracks south of the station so that it can be extended to hold a full 10-car set. I mean if they have to extend the trains, then they may as well go the full extension and have all the platforms accomodate a 10-car train. They should probably do the same for the in the future since there's only so many trains they can run before they have a train literally 'back to back'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BJC Posted June 28, 2010 Share #132 Posted June 28, 2010 The service changes make a lot of sense to me, especially for the service in Brooklyn/Queens. It seems like most people here are opposed to the ... is it just because of nostalgia? You're lucky 33rd st isn't here,because he would've rip you apart just for saying that.LMAO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LRG Posted June 28, 2010 Share #133 Posted June 28, 2010 You're lucky 33rd st isn't here,because he would've rip you apart just for saying that.LMAO Hilarity would then ensue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BJC Posted June 28, 2010 Share #134 Posted June 28, 2010 The only reason I like the because it can take me to midtown now without changing for another train. The reason why I hate the is because it doesn't transfer over to the for me to get to my college. Now I would have to take another train to get to the or take the to 14th street and the is local and the ramp from the to the is annoying. I prefer the (M2) way better. My father hates the a lot since now he has to take 3 trains to get to work. I really don't care for new or the old M since it doesn't affect me,however when I'm coming for SI I take the M to board st to transfer to the J to go home.I'll miss that connection...now I have to take the R or the N train to Canal.I won't lose any sleep over it, what is done is done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTR Admiralty Posted June 29, 2010 Share #135 Posted June 29, 2010 Extending platforms could be easily said than done. Try riding the out from Metro Avenue. There are many curves that easily slow down the line. They must be able to take a 600 foot train. Also all the stations from Metro to even Essex must be extended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted June 29, 2010 Share #136 Posted June 29, 2010 Of course it's not going to be easy, but if they were to extend them to hold 9-car trains, then they may as well do the full job and make all the platforms hold 10-car trains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Vandelay Posted June 29, 2010 Share #137 Posted June 29, 2010 There is a substantial difference in expense between extending one station by a carlength and extending every station on the line one carlength, with the exception of the previously mentioned station which would now need a two car extension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted June 29, 2010 Share #138 Posted June 29, 2010 The point is if this becomes 'too popular' how long will it be till they can't run enough trains to service the stations adequetly? The trains would need to be extended to 10-cars and that would allow flexibility with the other QB lines. The is also at or past capacity and should be extended as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trainmaster5 Posted June 29, 2010 Share #139 Posted June 29, 2010 Slow down with these platform extensions, please. The is crying poverty every day and you want major capital expenditures ? Maybe it's time to put down the pipe and take a deep breath of reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted June 29, 2010 Share #140 Posted June 29, 2010 I never said do it now, I'm thinking 'way into the future', which could be decades from now. Either way it was shortsighted to have only 8-car trains in Eastern Division. The can only run so many trains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trainmaster5 Posted June 29, 2010 Share #141 Posted June 29, 2010 I never said do it now, I'm thinking 'way into the future', which could be decades from now. Either way it was shortsighted to have only 8-car trains in Eastern Division. The can only run so many trains. Way back then trains were only 4,5, and 6 cars including rush hours on the BMT Eastern division. Have you ever seen pictures of the Myrtle, Lexington, and Fulton St Els ? The Brighton line, on the other side, only had 8 car stations until the early '60s and that was/is a major line back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ridgewoodian Posted June 29, 2010 Share #142 Posted June 29, 2010 The point is if this becomes 'too popular' how long will it be till they can't run enough trains to service the stations adequetly? The trains would need to be extended to 10-cars and that would allow flexibility with the other QB lines. The is also at or past capacity and should be extended as well. Sure, this would be nice. If they could do it by magic tomorrow I'd say do it. But the reality is it would involve essentially rebuilding nearly 30 stations, most of them elevated over busy streets. Not only would they have to be lengthened the ones with island platforms would also have to be widened. Also, from what I understand, certain sharp curves along the lines would have to be flattened. And, if I'm not mistaken, there's a limit to the size of trains the Willie B can handle. (Perhaps someone with more knowledge about that can speak to that.) So it would be a major, expensive, hugely disruptive undertaking. Which is why I suspect it hasn't been done already. I don't see it happening anytime in the near future. Probably a better use of money would be to increase the number of trains that can safely run on the lines. The new more or less retains the old (M2)'s absurd ten minute rush hour headways. If that were reduced to even six that would be a tremendous increase in capacity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.