R1103 Posted February 19, 2011 Share #76 Posted February 19, 2011 I would cut the to Smith-9th, and ressurect the as an local counterpart, kind of like the to the (local, express)... The Culver might need a peak express service some time sooner or later... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted February 19, 2011 Share #77 Posted February 19, 2011 People haven't talked much about the (Mx) and while most of these were cut because of budget cuts, I do believe they were handy. the made it faster to get through upper Manhattan, however the skip stopping started to not make sense after a while. the (Mx) and were good because they took the pressure of the during the week and gave Broadway and 4th Ave more local service. the was a good local route. Foxie let me offer some replies to the issues mentioned. 1)The problem with the in later years 'foxie' was that riders at skip stop stations felt that got less service as the combo had problems with realiblity issues. Not to mention Upper Manhattan neighborhoods such as Washington Heights and Inwood had a population boom in the late '90's/past deacde as well. Although service on all of the Bway line is better, the big issue is overcrowding by the time the gets going downtown by 103rd St. 2)The big problem of the being merged with the is this. While North Brooklyn i.e Williamsburg and Bushwick benefited for the 1st time in almost 35 years with a 1-seat ride to Midtown weekdays, another group of riders suffered. The 4th Ave Local customers in South Brooklyn. If the were smart IMO, they could just ran the as a 'rush hour' only train running between Astoria and Bay Parkway via the Montague Tunnel. It would helped the following. a)Still continue to give Astoria line riders a 1-seat ride peak hours to/from Lower Manhattan area. 2)Help out the unrealible train at 4th Ave stations. Also with the Fulton Street Center construction, well underway that will also connect the current and the at Corlandt, I don't think other than "G/O's, we will see a Nassau/South Brooklyn train route ever again. For that reason that why the hopefully when the fiscal crisis ends can return. 3)The and is actually a great idea. While like Forest Glen I also think the 'F' should have stayed on 53rd Street, it not coming back (He needs to understand that and not lose sleep) it makes the much more useful. Not to mention riding the new 'M" a few times I am sure it helps helped out at least a little taking off SRO on the . So this is a much better use of the former . Just my takes.:eek: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted February 19, 2011 Share #78 Posted February 19, 2011 I would cut the to Smith-9th, and ressurect the as an local counterpart, kind of like the to the (local, express)... The Culver might need a peak express service some time sooner or later... In reply R1103, are you ready for mega delays/conga lines if the terminates at Smith-9th? The when it ended at Smith-9th has to use the 'express' trains whether it's the or whatever it calls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTimer Posted February 19, 2011 Share #79 Posted February 19, 2011 The was cut because that skip-stop saved at most 2 minutes. It is only a 25 minute run to 96th from VC, and there are few timers or curves to slow the run. Unlike the Jamaica line there are several stops that were not "skipable" (231, 191, 181, 116 are all heavy-load stations, and Dyckman, 168 and 137 are gap stations with switches). In the meantime there are many stations between Myrtle and Sutphin that can be skipped. When the was going to be cut, the most likely senario was making some of those runs runs, and dropping the rest, which in the end is a service cut during rush hours. They would save a few jobs that way. The was a legit service cut by combination, the really became the with a transfer to the . Jobs were saved, and seniority models were altered as a result. But as others have said, keep going this route and suggestions of 6Av service to the Rockways, 8Av service to South Brooklyn, and the return of 8Av service to the Bronx/6Av service to the Heights would be next, along with local service to Jamaica that does not go express after Continental lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bus Guy Posted February 19, 2011 Author Share #80 Posted February 19, 2011 In reply R1103, are you ready for mega delays/conga lines if the terminates at Smith-9th? The when it ended at Smith-9th has to use the 'express' trains whether it's the or whatever it calls. If your gonna keep the on culver it has to go to church because the layover area is not in the way of anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urbanfortitude Posted February 19, 2011 Share #81 Posted February 19, 2011 My idea works like this. You would have Avenue X rebuilt as an express station, and you would have the extended to Avenue X to increase the TPH on the Culver Line. Then you speed up service on the Culver Line with a , and this service would run express between Bergen Street, and Church Avenue. At Church Avenue the service becomes peak directional. Thus now you increased the amount of trains running on the Culver Line, and you increase the speed of service with express service. Which would equal less complaints from the Culver Line. I'm sorry but wasn't the following post you like 5 pages ago? The is not going to Coney Island. Stop foaming there is no more room in Coney Island for another train unless they remove one. The is also a crosstown line, and people on the Culver Line would complain if it goes down the Culver Line, because they want Manhattan. Plus extending the to Manhattan would kill the purpose of the crosstown line so no. How the hell is an Eighth Avenue service get to Coney Island when there is no way it can be send down there without digging a connection to a Coney Island bound line. The has no money for foamtastic dreams. Get Real!.:mad: I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say I find it funny you reacting this way. I recall a thread some months ago where you had all kinds of crazy ideas for extending the to Manhattan and even so far as to bring it down by Bay Ridge. I'd find it easier to believe you had a change of heart or got sense slapped into you if not for these two differing posts of yours. So why don't you take it down a notch there? Some of this madness came out of your mouth too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted February 19, 2011 Share #82 Posted February 19, 2011 That was to Coney Island not down to Avenue X. Truthfully there isn't any room for the at Coney Island. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urbanfortitude Posted February 19, 2011 Share #83 Posted February 19, 2011 That was to Coney Island not down to Avenue X. Truthfully there isn't any room for the at Coney Island. It still doesn't change the fact you have mentioned ideas similar to if not exactly that as well as an extension to Manhattan. So you flipping off the handle for someone else saying it is borderline insane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted February 19, 2011 Share #84 Posted February 19, 2011 Yeah I guess I was a bit too harsh on him. Maybe just telling him straight facts would have helped. I guess it was a bit too far for a criticism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NX Express Posted February 19, 2011 Share #85 Posted February 19, 2011 Roadcruiser, please stop with the train. It's useless past Church Av, and there's no layover/relay space anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted February 19, 2011 Share #86 Posted February 19, 2011 Not really there are tracks leading to the Coney Island Yard at Avenue X. Plus we said the same thing when they mentioned extending the to Church Avenue in the first place. Also the Avenue X station is three tracked so there is some relay space. Really though I am not foaming here I am thinking of ways to increase the TPH on the Culver Line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTimer Posted February 19, 2011 Share #87 Posted February 19, 2011 Not really there are tracks leading to the Coney Island Yard at Avenue X. Plus we said the same thing when they mentioned extending the to Church Avenue in the first place. Also the Avenue X station is three tracked so there is some relay space. Really though I am not foaming here I am thinking of ways to increase the TPH on the Culver Line. Do you feel there are not enough TPH? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted February 19, 2011 Share #88 Posted February 19, 2011 If you are so sure that it isn't that then why are they crying for express service on the Culver Line in the first place?. What do you think?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted February 19, 2011 Share #89 Posted February 19, 2011 If you are so sure that it isn't that then why are they crying for express service on the Culver Line in the first place?. What do you think?. Culver 'express' service under current line patterns is only needed rush hours only. It's not like this coordior is the SRO packed Lex or Queens Blvd. lines. Not to mention the bulk of the heavy usage is between Church and Jay St. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted February 19, 2011 Share #90 Posted February 19, 2011 If you are so sure that it isn't that then why are they crying for express service on the Culver Line in the first place?. What do you think?. Those people are crying b/c they want faster service to manhattan. Sending G's via the Culver Express doesn't solve that issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted February 19, 2011 Share #91 Posted February 19, 2011 I am not making the express. It would be a local along the Culver Line along with the , but there would be a diamond offering express service on the Culver Viaduct, and it would offer peak directional express service on the Culver Elevated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted February 19, 2011 Share #92 Posted February 19, 2011 The G wont see that many more riders along the culver, than it currently does @ Church av; which isn't all that much to begin with.... the line is an afterthought, south of Hoyt-Schermerhorn... extending it via the culver local would be even worse!! Amongst current F riders, it would be viewed as sticking it to them - The same way they probably felt when talks about extending the old V to Brooklyn emerged.... Why are we even talking about increasing TPH on the culver anyway.... If it's anyone that should be complaining about F service, it's Queens riders, not us Brooklynites.... face it dude, that supplemental service you want to place along that stretch of the F is unwarranted.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T to Dyre Avenue Posted February 19, 2011 Share #93 Posted February 19, 2011 My idea works like this. You would have Avenue X rebuilt as an express station, and you would have the extended to Avenue X to increase the TPH on the Culver Line. Then you speed up service on the Culver Line with a , and this service would run express between Bergen Street, and Church Avenue. At Church Avenue the service becomes peak directional. Thus now you increased the amount of trains running on the Culver Line, and you increase the speed of service with express service. Which would equal less complaints from the Culver Line. But by running an express, wouldn't that result in an overall service cut to the local stations between Church and Bergen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted February 19, 2011 Share #94 Posted February 19, 2011 That is why I wanted to extend the farther down the Culver Line as a local, because of the overall cut in the service if there would be a , but no one is listening to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2Line1291 Posted February 19, 2011 Share #95 Posted February 19, 2011 Just a thought.... the and switched nothern terminals. The terminals at Forest Hills via 63rd St and Queens Local and the at 179th St via 53rd St and Queens Exp. Less stations for the to handle alone, then have a express to Coney Island and local to Church Av Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted February 19, 2011 Share #96 Posted February 19, 2011 That won't work the runs local on the Queens Boulevard Line. The is express. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2Line1291 Posted February 19, 2011 Share #97 Posted February 19, 2011 That won't work the runs local on the Queens Boulevard Line. The is express.Really.... Just a thought.... the and switched nothern terminals. The terminals at Forest Hills via 63rd St and Queens Local and the at 179th St via 53rd St and Queens Exp. Less stations for the to handle alone, then have a express to Coney Island and local to Church Av Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GojiMet86 Posted February 19, 2011 Share #98 Posted February 19, 2011 Hmm...well, both the local and the express tracks have access to the relay tracks, so that wouldn't limit the from ending at Forest Hills... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NX Express Posted February 19, 2011 Share #99 Posted February 19, 2011 IMO it might be reasonable to make the Culver Express service go to 96 St/2 Av whenever that opens. That, with an increase in service (they could go to 179), would IMO be perfect for riders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GojiMet86 Posted February 19, 2011 Share #100 Posted February 19, 2011 IMO it might be reasonable to make the Culver Express service go to 96 St/2 Av whenever that opens. That, with an increase in service (they could go to 179), would IMO be perfect for riders. That's an interesting proposal. But do you think that the and the Culver Express should both run to 96 St., or just the Express? Or perhaps the and a rush hour only Culver Express service? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.