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.
EE Broadway Local

SUBWAY - Random Thoughts Topic

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Abba said:

I have a question . Was there. Ever  G.O where the (1) skipped 145th st? In other words a complete run from 157-96? I know they have done 145 to 96 but I want to know if it ever started from 157?

I think I once was on one like that back in 2012 (I remember getting on at 157th and having a very quick ride to 59th in like 10-15 mins; it could have been 137-96 though)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/6/2019 at 9:37 PM, subwayfan1998 said:

Hey Guys

How do you envision NYC Subways in 50 Years?

NTTs everywhere! The horror!

 

 

/s

  • LMAO! 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

NTTs everywhere! The horror!

 

 

/s

The Subway is going to have two types of cars. The NTTs and the open gangway R2XXs. Its going to be really bland since the post 90s cars are so similar. A Transit fan will tell the difference. But to the average person, they are nearly identical. The only main thing separating the NTTs are the Propulsion sounds. Other than that, they look the same on both the interior and exterior.

Besides sound (and maybe some little things here and there)

What's different about a R142 - R142A - and R188?

What's different about an R143, R160A, R160B, R179. 

To me, they are all the same train. And the subway system is getting more stale by the day. 

There is a reason why people mainly fan on the :A: and (C). There's mad diversity (R32, R46, R68, R179, R211 in the future) Compare it to the (2) where it just has 1 car type. 

Liked it better when you could on any line and expect anything to show up. Now I don't hate NTTs, but when we got a fleet that has very cars similar on almost every subway line, its going to become stale. Like besides the noise it makes, what's the difference of catching an R160 Alstom vs a R160 Siemens on the (N). Or catching a R143 or R160 on the (L). Its all the same.

50 years from now I'm probably going to find the Subway Stations more interesting than the actual rolling stock we will have. (I love the newly updated  28 St, the stations in 50 years are going to look great).

But the NTTs do their job, and I hope they last long, but you gotta admit that the subway is loosing its "charm".

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since when did the MTA start putting LED advertising panels in subway cars (the square ones next to the doors)? 7560 has at least one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Orion6025 said:

Since when did the MTA start putting LED advertising panels in subway cars (the square ones next to the doors)? 7560 has at least one

I believe this is a recent thing they've begun to test on the R188s. I haven't seen one personally yet

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, subwayfan1998 said:

Why Horror?

You missed the /s, which is used to denote sarcasm lol

  • LMAO! 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Does anyone think that the weekend (M) extension along 6th Ave to 96th street will become a permanent thing after the whole (L) project is done? I feel that having a 3rd service along will perhaps be something that is requested especially if more people from 2nd Ave use it to access Midtown/ 6th Ave and northern Brooklyn.  I also think that it’s good having another along 6th anyways. 

 

I just wonder why the MTA has not updated station signs to reflect that the (M) goes to 96th Street late evenings and weekends. Those pink fliers that they are placed in the stations are already falling down and I think not having proper signage will confuse people. The (M) to 96th is not even on the map so it makes me wonder if they ever plan to put it on there. 

Edited by NewFlyer 230
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

Does anyone think that the weekend (M) extension along 6th Ave to 96th street will become a permanent thing after the whole (L) project is done? I feel that having a 3rd service along will perhaps be something that is requested especially if more people from 2nd Ave use it to access Midtown/ 6th Ave and northern Brooklyn.  I also think that it’s good having another along 6th anyways. 

Yeah why not? It would be really great for the Upper East Side. Provides direct service between the Myrtle Avenue corridor and all of the weekend shopping that exists in SoHo and Midtown (Essex Street is not even close to SoHo).

I am also proposing both the (M) and (R) be extended to Jamaica-179th Street and have the (F) moved off the express tracks at all times except late nights, when it would continue to make the slow switching maneuver at 75th Avenue (which delays (E) train service). This would allow for direct service between Hillside Avenue and the Broadways corridor for Broadway theater goers and those looking to see The Late Show with Stephen Colbert. 6th Avenue riders would see an increase in trip time by 3-5 minutes but everyone else would save time.

Also, late night (M) service should also be extended to Essex Street to permit easy travel between Brooklyn and the nigh life that exists in the Lower East Side.

To accompany this, I would also propose either extending the (J) / (Z) lines together to Bay Ridge-95th Street or a separate route from the (J) / (Z) that would either operate between Broadway Jct and 95th Street or overlay the current (M) (NOT replace it) and operate between Metro Avenue and 95th Street. This would improve service.

Finally, I am proposing that (M) service have headway increases. During weekdays, service would operate with 14 trains per hour, with (J) / (Z) service operating at 10 trains per hour. This would provide more frequent service for (M) riders. (F) service may be reduced, but given how passengers north of Church Avenue has the (G) train and south of Church Avenue have an easy crosstown walk or bus ride to other train lines, like the (D)(N) and (B)(Q), all of which can take on additional riders, they’ll be fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

An extension of the (R) to 179th is a poor idea as it should be removed from QBL entirely. 

( (N)(Q) to 96, (R) to Astoria, (W) eliminated)

An extension of the (J) is also a bad idea as the line doesn’t need to be longer and less reliable. 

Edited by R68OnBroadway
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said:

An extension of the (J) is also a bad idea as the line doesn’t need to be longer and less reliable. 

I also proposed a counter-proposal of an new route running between Broadway Junction on the (J) or Metropolitan Avenue on the (M) and 95th Street. It would supplement the existing routes, not replace them Clearly you missed that part.

19 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said:

An extension of the (R) to 179th is a poor idea as it should be removed from QBL entirely. 

( (N)(Q) to 96, (R) to Astoria, (W) eliminated)

Not without a new yard for the (R) train fleet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

I also proposed a counter-proposal of an new route running between Broadway Junction on the (J) or Metropolitan Avenue on the (M) and 95th Street. It would supplement the existing routes, not replace them Clearly you missed that part.

Not without a new yard for the (R) train fleet.

I read the proposal and stated that the (J) extension was bad to rule out that part.

As for the (R), we have gone over this about 10 million times. While the cars would get extra mileage from deadheading, it wouldn’t be the end of the world.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said:

As for the (R), we have gone over this about 10 million times. While the cars would get extra mileage from deadheading, it wouldn’t be the end of the world.

With the conversion of the 36th Street Yard for passenger use, it could be viable for the (R) to use that yard for train maintenance, with around 12 storage tracks used for storing trains, and some work trains relocated to nearby Coney Island Yard and other areas. However, that project is part of the Second Avenue Subway project, which will provide additional train cars for (T) service in Phase 3, whenever the hell that opens, so the reroute of the (R) would have to wait until the yard conversion is complete to avoid potential reliability problems. Building a new yard in Astoria, good luck convincing Astoria residents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a new program for the (J) on one of the R179s and I have no idea what they were thinking...

(J) JAMAICA SKIP-STOP

(ok good)

(J) BROADWAY LOCAL

(um... what...)

(J) BROAD ST 

(meh, it said that before)

 

I still don't understand their aversion to Nassau Street for one and two "Broadway Local"? :huh: That's totally not going to get confused with the Broadway line in Manhattan... <_<

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Around the Horn said:

There's a new program for the (J) on one of the R179s and I have no idea what they were thinking...

(J) JAMAICA SKIP-STOP

(ok good)

(J) BROADWAY LOCAL

(um... what...)

(J) BROAD ST 

(meh, it said that before)

 

I still don't understand their aversion to Nassau Street for one and two "Broadway Local"? :huh: That's totally not going to get confused with the Broadway line in Manhattan... <_<

It should have been “BWAY-BKLYN LOCAL” as they programmed with the (M) when it ran to Broadway Jct. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, subwayfan1998 said:

How would NYC Subway would have look like now, if September 11th Terror Attacks never happened?

Cortlandt St (1) would still exist as it was. (V) service would have started on 9/17. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Union Tpke said:

Cortlandt St (1) would still exist as it was. (V) service would have started on 9/17. 

were there any plans to introduce (V) service before 9/11?
 

Without 9/11, Would the NYC Subways would still look the Same Except Cortlandt St?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, subwayfan1998 said:

Without 9/11, Would the NYC Subways would still look the Same Except Cortlandt St?

Yes. The only station that was damaged was Cortlandt. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

There's a new program for the (J) on one of the R179s and I have no idea what they were thinking...

(J) JAMAICA SKIP-STOP

(ok good)

(J) BROADWAY LOCAL

(um... what...)

(J) BROAD ST 

(meh, it said that before)

 

I still don't understand their aversion to Nassau Street for one and two "Broadway Local"? :huh:That's totally not going to get confused with the Broadway line in Manhattan... <_<

They run completely different routes , who’s really gonna get confused ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, VIP said:

It should have been “BWAY-BKLYN LOCAL” as they programmed with the (M) when it ran to Broadway Jct. 

that definitely would’ve made more sense 😭

( not sarcasm )

Edited by Maxwell179

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Maxwell179 said:

They run completely different routes , who’s really gonna get confused ?

Uhhhhhhh..........Any tourist?

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Maxwell179 said:

They run completely different routes , who’s really gonna get confused ?

Even so it's a policy to not have two lines share names... (of course since it's the MTA, they break their own style guide rules all the time)

This is the same reason why the (1) is called the "Broadway-7th Avenue Local" and the (2)(3) are the "7th Avenue Express"

Officially the (J) is the "Nassau Street-Jamaica Line" and the Jamaica Line hasn't been called the Broadway Brooklyn line since 1976.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Around the Horn said:

Even so it's a policy to not have two lines share names... (of course since it's the MTA, they break their own style guide rules all the time)

This is the same reason why the (1) is called the "Broadway-7th Avenue Local" and the (2)(3) are the "7th Avenue Express"

Officially the (J) is the "Nassau Street-Jamaica Line" and the Jamaica Line hasn't been called the Broadway Brooklyn line since 1976.

Learn something new everyday 

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.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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