Jump to content

SUBWAY - Random Thoughts Topic


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Union Tpke said:

We really take our great transit system for granted.

This morning I went for a blood test, leaving the house at 6:30 and going two stops on the subway, only waiting a couple minutes for a train, walking for a few minutes to the place, arriving early. After the blood test, I walked for a few minutes, had something to eat at my favorite bagel place. Then I walked a minute to the subway, and got on a train right as it came in. I just got home. 

In almost every other place in the country, I would have to drive. Keep in mind, I wasn't able to have anything to eat before the test. So, I would be driving on an empty stomach early in the morning. In suburbs, uses are strictly segregated, so it would have to be an at least 15 minute drive. With traffic, it would be longer. Before I could get to the place, I would need to find parking. After the blood test, I wouldn't be able to quickly go nearby to get something to eat. That would be another 15 minute drive plus parking. After having something to eat, I would have to then drive all the way home.

Great public transit is freeing. I hadn't considered what this trip would have been like without good transit until this morning. I would love to here about other trips you guys take that would be much harder without good transit.

Hear. I cringe at typos that pass through....

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 30.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 hour ago, NST said:

Why don’t R46s ever run on the (E)?

More specifically, R160's have shorter dwell times at stops, and break down less than the R46's. Newer trains on the crowded line prove to work better than old ones so a plurality remains R160s. The (E) is also slated to get CBTC soon, any SMEE (like the 46's) simply wont work on the (E) soon.

The 46's last frequently ran on the (E) in the late 2000's

Edited by NoHacksJustKhaks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NST said:

Why don’t R46s ever run on the (E)?

Their higher dwell times would cause issues given the crowds along the line... I still don’t understand why the (F) has some 46s and the some (R) 160s considering that with the exception of lower Manhattan commuters, most (R) riders are only on for a few stops...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, R68OnBroadway said:

Their higher dwell times would cause issues given the crowds along the line... I still don’t understand why the (F) has some 46s and the some (R) 160s considering that with the exception of lower Manhattan commuters, most (R) riders are only on for a few stops...

I said the same exact thing. Don’t see the need for the (R) to have some R160s. It should be entirely R46s.

If the R46s were really such a serious issue on the line in terms of dwell times, they would have made it entirely R160s already, in exchange for the (F) having the R46s instead.

Much of the (R) train delays usually come from merging delays with other lines and headway maintenance (and in addition during the off peak, flagging). I think that during the AM Rush, the (D) and (N) get packed even before they reach 36th and 59th Streets respectively and remain that way up till after Midtown. The (B), (D), (N), and (Q) out of Brooklyn during the AM Rush are more crowded than the (R) I think.

I noticed they run more R160s than R46s on the (R) on weekends (when all lines in the system run much less frequently and therefore, require much less trains) anyway so.

Edited by Jemorie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

There is an (M) program to 145 Street. The problem is it's heavily glitched (I mean it says its a 145 Street bound (A) express train at 7th Avenue and a Myrtle-Wyckoff bound (M) practically everywhere else) so they went to plan B which was use the 42nd-Bryant Park program and make manual announcements from there.

Actually part of that is not true. Not every R160 has the the (M) program to 145th Street.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, YankeesPwnMets said:

Sounds absolutely ridiculous but how possible would it be to run (M) trains from Canarsie to 96 on weekends to preserve the one seat ride to 14 St, while running the shuttle between MV and Myrtle??

I don't see how in reality this would happen. For that to happen, my guess would be if the following happened:

  1. There are switch problems that are preventing the (M) to go past Myrtle Av-Broadway to Metropolitan Av, so the (M) would have to split in two: A shuttle between Myrtle Av to Metropolitan Av and from 96 St to Myrtle Av, then via the (J) to Broadway Junction
  2. Let's say #1 happened. For the (M) to go to Canarsie, at the same time there should be some delay in (L) service that are preventing the (L) from reaching Canarsie, so maybe the (M) could be redirected via the (L) to Canarsie to fill in the gap. That would make the full (M) route between Canarsie to 96 St-2 Av on weekends.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, New Flyer Xcelsior said:

Are there any trams (such as the BQX) that actually might be built sometime in the (somewhat) near future? And, am I wrong that there was a proposal to link 116 St (1) to the 125 St MNR station if West Side Access is built?

That sounds sorta  unnecessary. A 125th stop on MNR would be a 3-block walk to the 1 at 125th.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Italianstallion said:

That sounds sorta  unnecessary. A 125th stop on MNR would be a 3-block walk to the 1 at 125th.

True -- that's why I was thinking "Why would they build that?" But, they might build a tram to supplement the Bx15, M60SBS, M100, and M101 on 125 St, connecting to the (1)(A)(B)(C)(D)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6) and MNR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, New Flyer Xcelsior said:

True -- that's why I was thinking "Why would they build that?" But, they might build a tram to supplement the Bx15, M60SBS, M100, and M101 on 125 St, connecting to the (1)(A)(B)(C)(D)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6) and MNR.

A better solution would be to extend the Second Ave. subway west along 125th to the river.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/20/2019 at 10:18 AM, CenSin said:

I’d like to know what the union demanded from the MTA and what else the MTA is trying to cut that the union would be too embarrassed to complain about.

http://www.twulocal100.org/sites/twulocal100.org/files/twu_rejects_mta_contract_offer.pdf

For the whole 

http://www.twulocal100.org/sites/twulocal100.org/files/mta_contract_proposal_aug_19.pdf

Link to comment
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.