SUBWAY - Random Thoughts Topic

[RR503]

1 hour ago, Jemorie said:

Wrong. Subway ridership is down on weekends because alot of people are off from school and work with some exceptions such as public schools having Saturday school classes only for those who failed their regular classes the previous semester or previous marking period. Honestly, how the hell is that comparing chicken and egg?

Is weekend ridership gonna be lower than weekday ridership? Yes. Are current ridership levels indicative of demand? No. My point with the chicken and egg is that current use of weekend trains tells us astonishingly little about how much people want to travel on weekends because the trains, as my friend put it, are always f**ked up. People avoid them, whether that be by Ubering, walking, or simply not travelling. 

1 hour ago, Jemorie said:

Also, I never said anything about reducing service further. I get that you are a highly an informative member of the forums, but nevertheless, the whole reason why I disagree with having the extended  is, once again, ridership. If you are traveling within a borough, no one will take the subway unless you don't have a car or unless you don't live near a bus line. Those who don't work or go to school will instead head out to shop, go to movies, visit friends/family, etc. But that all depends on where exactly they're going in those cases.

Not that I'm a frequent  user, but the times I've ridden it (mostly across the bridge/on lower 6th) it's been well over 125% seated capacity, which tells us that...wait for it...current  service levels are actually less than what is actually required. 

As for ridership patterns, I...do not follow your point. Plenty of people travel to the core on weekends, whether that be because there are plenty of non-work activities in Manhattan or because people frequently work weekends. Intraborough riders also frequently use the subway (when it's running, that is) -- people gravitate towards the system wherever possible, because it's almost always faster than a bus and is (again, when functional) less of a hassle than hailing/owning a car. 

1 hour ago, Jemorie said:

Generally, if trains are not carrying more than the average guideline, then more service isn't needed. In theory, the only way you could do that is if you put any or all track workers and signal workers on completely closed lines instead of both fully closed lines and under traffic.

That is where the problem lies. You get my drift?

Let me give you a scenario. There's a transit service which runs, say, 3 trains per hour on a corridor with a good number of alternatives (a highway, good biking infrastructure and maybe a bus route) and gets relatively little ridership. Is the lack of ridership indicative of no one wanting to use the subway, or is it more a function of no one wanting to have to program 20 minutes of flex time into their schedules because the train only comes 3 times an hour? Extend this logic across the system: are there underutilized subway lines on weekends because there's no demand, or because weekend subway service is, euh, crap? 

As for work, it's not that simple. There exist ways to eliminate adjacent track flagging (track barriers) -- it's just a matter of getting them in use and then convincing service planners at the MTA that they can, in fact, use the newfound weekend capacity to increase service. 

[R68OnBroadway]

1 hour ago, RR503 said:

Extend this logic across the system: are there underutilized subway lines on weekends because there's no demand, or because weekend subway service is, euh, crap? 

Given how crap weekend  service is, I'm surprised the line past Rockaway (and especially RPK) even has ridership at all... should be rather telling that the ferry to Fulton Street is faster than a direct subway ride to that very same place... 

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

8 hours ago, R68OnBroadway said:

Given how crap weekend  service is, I'm surprised the line past Rockaway (and especially RPK) even has ridership at all... should be rather telling that the ferry to Fulton Street is faster than a direct subway ride to that very same place... 

But the thing is that the ferry runs hourly, so sticking to the train makes sense. Plus, a lot of those people using trains in the Rockaways outside of rush hours aren't going to Manhattan.

[Lil 57]

Someone's not happy...

 

[Jemorie]

8 hours ago, RR503 said:

Is weekend ridership gonna be lower than weekday ridership? Yes. Are current ridership levels indicative of demand? No. My point with the chicken and egg is that current use of weekend trains tells us astonishingly little about how much people want to travel on weekends because the trains, as my friend put it, are always f**ked up. People avoid them, whether that be by Ubering, walking, or simply not travelling. 

Not that I'm a frequent  user, but the times I've ridden it (mostly across the bridge/on lower 6th) it's been well over 125% seated capacity, which tells us that...wait for it...current  service levels are actually less than what is actually required. 

As for ridership patterns, I...do not follow your point. Plenty of people travel to the core on weekends, whether that be because there are plenty of non-work activities in Manhattan or because people frequently work weekends. Intraborough riders also frequently use the subway (when it's running, that is) -- people gravitate towards the system wherever possible, because it's almost always faster than a bus and is (again, when functional) less of a hassle than hailing/owning a car. 

Let me give you a scenario. There's a transit service which runs, say, 3 trains per hour on a corridor with a good number of alternatives (a highway, good biking infrastructure and maybe a bus route) and gets relatively little ridership. Is the lack of ridership indicative of no one wanting to use the subway, or is it more a function of no one wanting to have to program 20 minutes of flex time into their schedules because the train only comes 3 times an hour? Extend this logic across the system: are there underutilized subway lines on weekends because there's no demand, or because weekend subway service is, euh, crap? 

As for work, it's not that simple. There exist ways to eliminate adjacent track flagging (track barriers) -- it's just a matter of getting them in use and then convincing service planners at the MTA that they can, in fact, use the newfound weekend capacity to increase service. 

#1 and #4: Fine, you got me yet again....  Doesn't mean you are 100% correct though. Especially your #4 paragraph. You're just making a statement that is more true for the Lefferts Blvd and Far Rockaway branches of the  line, and the whole Rockaway Park  shuttle line, not the rest of the system. The shuttle, in particular, does not need the extra service for obvious reasons. As for the other branches, obviously you know because of Lefferts customers want a one-seat express ride instead of a local first, transfer to express second ride. The only other way I agree with having the  to and from Lefferts Blvd and all  's to and from the Rockaways (mind you, keyword, alternating between Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park, not every single train going to and from one branch whilst the shuttle serving the other) is if the  runs express in Brooklyn, but what will serve the local in return? But that's another topic for another time....anyway, heading back to the  topic:

#2: ...and that is where you wonder...why bother disagreeing with me that the  should not be extended outside of the current weekend partial  shutdown when you do not frequent the line? On top of that, it is well over 125% of a seated load because of the . Using your #4 paragraph to prove my point, the  is at 20 minute headways between 8th Avenue and Bedford Avenue, and every 10 minutes the rest of the line. Like you said, nobody wants to plan their schedules accordingly with any line's frequency. This is the subway we're talking about after all. So unless you are referring to the fact that, prior to the current weekend partial  shutdown, the 240-foot long  trains (on 10-minute headways or 12-minute headways) were carrying more than 53 people per car (212 people per train) on 60 foot equipment, I'm not just gonna sweep everything I stated under the rug and take your words to heart. I remember last time when we both had a similar argument about the  (in this case, about shorting some trains at 2nd Avenue) that I should have provided data instead of simply just disagreeing. But you, in particular, have also not provided any data yourself to further prove your point.

If the  on 6th Avenue and/or the  on Queens Blvd are above the 125% seated capacity, whatever, run the extended the . But if it is relatively lightly loaded, then you just run a two or three more trains an hour on the  and  each instead. Other than either of the two options, more service is not warranted. NYC Transit goes by average car load anyway, not by individual trains.

#3: That is why I said with some exceptions...how did that slip past your head? But you also have to factor that plenty of people already do that on weekdays as well, particularly school field trips, summer campers etc. People who shop on weekends in particular aren't going to take the subway. They would rather just drive instead.

#5: What more do you want? There's no other way I can think of them increasing service. In order for that to happen, they need to send every worker to fully closed lines instead of concurrently with under traffic. Unless you extend the running times on every line to accommodate the right of way while at the same time increasing service, but that is a an all honestly a pretty terrible option because now trains would run much slower throughout some areas of their routes. Queens Blvd deals with this all the time on weekends as well as every other line concurrently, but only from time to time.

[RR503]

2 hours ago, Jemorie said:

#1 and #4: Fine, you got me yet again....  Doesn't mean you are 100% correct though. Especially your #4 paragraph. You're just making a statement that is more true for the Lefferts Blvd and Far Rockaway branches of the  line, and the whole Rockaway Park  shuttle line, not the rest of the system. The shuttle, in particular, does not need the extra service for obvious reasons. As for the other branches, obviously you know because of Lefferts customers want a one-seat express ride instead of a local first, transfer to express second ride. The only other way I agree with having the  to and from Lefferts Blvd and all  's to and from the Rockaways (mind you, keyword, alternating between Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park, not every single train going to and from one branch whilst the shuttle serving the other) is if the  runs express in Brooklyn, but what will serve the local in return? But that's another topic for another time....anyway, heading back to the  topic:

I should have been clearer: I'm presenting a logical framework here, not saying that this is something that happens *only* on lines that run 3tph. People (myself included) are equally deterred by 5tph service, etc. There's a whole world of transit studies that focuses solely on the way demand responds to changes in headways -- the metric they use is known as headway elasticity of demand. Look it up, it's quite interesting. 

3 hours ago, Jemorie said:

#2: ...and that is where you wonder...why bother disagreeing with me that the  should not be extended outside of the current weekend partial  shutdown when you do not frequent the line? On top of that, it is well over 125% of a seated load because of the . Using your #4 paragraph to prove my point, the  is at 20 minute headways between 8th Avenue and Bedford Avenue, and every 10 minutes the rest of the line. Like you said, nobody wants to plan their schedules accordingly with any line's frequency. This is the subway we're talking about after all. So unless you are referring to the fact that, prior to the current weekend partial  shutdown, the 240-foot long  trains (on 10-minute headways or 12-minute headways) were carrying more than 53 people per car (212 people per train) on 60 foot equipment, I'm not just gonna sweep everything I stated under the rug and take your words to heart. I remember last time when we both had a similar argument about the  (in this case, about shorting some trains at 2nd Avenue) that I should have provided data instead of simply just disagreeing. But you, in particular, have also not provided any data yourself to further prove your point.

Before the  shutdown, the  was a somewhat miserable experience on weekends. Even at its 4 minute headways, it ran well above 125% seated (especially in the evenings). The , for its part, was not at all empty -- it carried a good number of people, but whenever I rode it, it seemed the line's Manhattan connection (to the ) was being used as a 'transfer of last resort,' with many dumping for the  or . So I draw a few objections to cutting service. For one, why? Assuming current work practices stay intact, there's simply nowhere else we can send the train miles -- everyone else runs to the flagging capacity of their line segment. Do we just want to cut service? Returning to the demand issue, though, I would be very interested to see an analysis of the degree to which  converts have been a consequence of the 's absence versus the 's presence (do you see the distinction there?). Giving the  a link to lines that are not the  in Manhattan is quite good for riders -- I would think that a good bit of increased use is more related to that than it is to the 's issues. We'd need a study to do this properly, but given all of the above, I'm quite skeptical that there's no demand. 

3 hours ago, Jemorie said:

If the  on 6th Avenue and/or the  on Queens Blvd are above the 125% seated capacity, whatever, run the extended the . But if it is relatively lightly loaded, then you just run a two or three more trains an hour on the  and  each instead. Other than either of the two options, more service is not warranted. NYC Transit goes by average car load anyway, not by individual trains.

A lil confused here. Post-2021 you *may* be able to squeeze more tph out of the , but the 's interaction with 4th Avenue and Broadway means that it's going to keep getting shot by flagging until NYCT gets its shit together or those corridors get CBTC. 

3 hours ago, Jemorie said:

#3: That is why I said with some exceptions...how did that slip past your head? But you also have to factor that plenty of people already do that on weekdays as well, particularly school field trips, summer campers etc. People who shop on weekends in particular aren't going to take the subway. They would rather just drive instead.

Your original post stated "no one will take the subway unless you don't have a car or unless you don't live near a bus line" relative to people's off peak, intra-boro travel patterns. I merely wished to point out that the exceptions are more like the rule here -- the subway is the *preferred* mode rather than the mode of last resort. To the volume of travel point, yeah, of course there's non-commutation demand on weekdays, but is quite orthogonal to the fact that there's a ton of latent demand on weekends. If you look domestically and internationally, you'll see that some of the greatest achieved ridership increases have been those that upped weekend service levels and took advantage of the relatively elastic demand for transit service during those time periods. Houston got something like a 30% increase in Sunday ridership out of their redesign, for example.

Speaking of totally unsubstantiated assumptions, do provide some data on this supposed preference to drive to shops. As we say on Culver,  is for reight on weekends. 

3 hours ago, Jemorie said:

#5: What more do you want? There's no other way I can think of them increasing service. In order for that to happen, they need to send every worker to fully closed lines instead of concurrently with under traffic. Unless you extend the running times on every line to accommodate the right of way while at the same time increasing service, but that is a an all honestly a pretty terrible option because now trains would run much slower throughout some areas of their routes. Queens Blvd deals with this all the time on weekends as well as every other line concurrently, but only from time to time.

First of all, the issue with service levels and flagging is not running times, it's capacity. Remember, fixed block signal systems are designed to protect a train moving at the maximum attainable speed for an area and thus have long control distances. That's okay if you're running service at normal speeds, but if you reduce it all to 10mph, you end up with a situation where you're enforcing enormous separations between (very) slow moving trains -- that reduces capacity. 

My point, though, is that flagging need not exist in many cases. NYCT actually *has* the beginnings of the necessary equipment to end adjacent track flagging, they just have yet to actually do something with them. I'd start there, and then work towards more shutdown-based GOs (as you say) and some honest to god maintenance productivity reforms. 

[Around the Horn]

I'm late to the whole  train discussion, but I'm inclined to believe that a regularly scheduled full length  train on 6th Avenue on the weekends (rather than only running when there's an issue with the ) would hypothetically get better ridership than we're seeing now: 1. because it is 6th Avenue which serves many places of interest and tourist attractions and surely people on the  would want to go there on weekends and would use the service and 2. because it's permanent nature would encourage use. Right now, its permanent but not so permanent status is a barrier to use because one has to question whether its actually running at the time they're traveling. Making the  a permanent service and committing to providing the service regardless of how the  is that particular weekend removes that barrier.

[Jemorie]

4 hours ago, RR503 said:

First of all, the issue with service levels and flagging is not running times, it's capacity. Remember, fixed block signal systems are designed to protect a train moving at the maximum attainable speed for an area and thus have long control distances. That's okay if you're running service at normal speeds, but if you reduce it all to 10mph, you end up with a situation where you're enforcing enormous separations between (very) slow moving trains -- that reduces capacity. 

My point, though, is that flagging need not exist in many cases. NYCT actually *has* the beginnings of the necessary equipment to end adjacent track flagging, they just have yet to actually do something with them. I'd start there, and then work towards more shutdown-based GOs (as you say) and some honest to god maintenance productivity reforms. 

Where in my post did I say that the issue with service levels and flagging is running times? I basically implied that the issue with current weekend service levels is flagging. This is where running times have to be adjusted. Look at the printed schedules on some lines for Saturday and Sunday, and you’ll see. In theory, as I stated (before you misinterpreted), you could still increase service. Ruminate. The only difference is speed will be slow instead of normal. That is all. And that is honestly bad service because almost no one who rides the subway plan their trips in accordance to every line’s schedules compared to LIRR, MNRR, and SIR where trains run much less frequently since they are all commuter-based railroads. That’s all I said.

And once again, just send every track and signal worker to fully closed lines and call it a day. Because you know that they obviously they cannot do it under traffic. It’s a safety issue compared to no traffic at all whatsoever, which is faster, cheaper, and safer. Also while you’re at it, eliminate the constant sending trains local or express in one or all directions since fully closed lines would be better off anyway. This way, you can increase service on any line you wish. But NYC Transit is quite careful when it comes to making sure that service levels meet closer to or within their guidelines. They are not going to increase service just because.

And if you’re really that eager to keep the current extended  after the  shutdown, whatever smh. I just hope you are right that the ridership will increase further. If not, then it stays how it is outside of the  shutdown. Period. I mean you might as well run the  and  on weekends too while you’re at it along with the extended  to and from Flatbush.

[RR503]

31 minutes ago, Jemorie said:

Where in my post did I say that the issue with service levels and flagging is running times? I basically implied that the issue with current weekend service levels is flagging. This is where running times have to be adjusted. Look at the printed schedules on some lines for Saturday and Sunday, and you’ll see. In theory, as I stated (before you misinterpreted), you could still increase service. Ruminate. The only difference is speed will be slow instead of normal. That is all. And that is honestly bad service because almost no one who rides the subway plan their trips in accordance to every line’s schedules compared to LIRR, MNRR, and SIR where trains run much less frequently since they are all commuter-based railroads. That’s all I said.

Quite confused. The reason today's service levels exist as they do is because there isn't capacity to run more service because of the signal/flagging interaction I described above. Extended running times are a manifestation of flagging, but have little to do with service levels beyond their linkage to cost/crew availability. 

33 minutes ago, Jemorie said:

And once again, just send every track and signal worker to fully closed lines and call it a day. Because you know that they obviously they cannot do it under traffic. It’s a safety issue compared to no traffic at all whatsoever, which is faster, cheaper, and safer. Also while you’re at it, eliminate the constant sending trains local or express in one or all directions since fully closed lines would be better off anyway. This way, you can increase service on any line you wish. 

I would love full shutdowns, too. They up productivity, create legible service patterns, and force departments to coordinate. But there are some cases where they'll actually reduce the number of trains you can run to a figure below what you'd get by sending all service in a direction local/express/via a different route; not all terminals are created equal. Because of this, and because of the sheer complexity of work planning, there will inevitably be some jobs that have to be done under adjacent track flagging, and I think it's worth considering that there exist ways to eliminate flagging (=its capacity impacts) in those conditions -- that's all I'm saying. 

37 minutes ago, Jemorie said:

But NYC Transit is quite careful when it comes to making sure that service levels meet closer to or within their guidelines. They are not going to increase service just because.

And if you’re really that eager to keep the current extended  after the  shutdown, whatever smh. I just hope you are right that the ridership will increase further. If not, then it stays how it is outside of the  shutdown. Period. I mean you might as well run the  and  on weekends too while you’re at it along with the extended  to and from Flatbush.

Two things:

1) One of the things I've repeatedly objected to through the course of this conversation is NYCT's loading guidelines. They are quite literally myopic. I'd like them to increase service on some lines 'just because' because service increases happens to be one of the best ways of attracting new ridership (though this is contingent on there being ops funding avail for such moves). So the guideline point is absolutely correct relative to current conditions, but, much like adjacent track flagging, should not be seen as an immutable reality. 

2) I'd love it if we ran all those trains on weekends, but I also understand there are real-world trade-offs and constraints. Even in a world without ATF, you'd be hard pressed to fit more than 20-24 tph onto a single track during some "everyone via local" GO operation, so keeping the number of service variants down (ideally to a maximum of 3 services/corridor, which allows each to run at 6-8tph even under GO) is definitely a worthy goal. 

[T to Dyre Avenue]

3 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

I'm late to the whole  train discussion, but I'm inclined to believe that a regularly scheduled full length  train on 6th Avenue on the weekends (rather than only running when there's an issue with the ) would hypothetically get better ridership than we're seeing now: 1. because it is 6th Avenue which serves many places of interest and tourist attractions and surely people on the  would want to go there on weekends and would use the service and 2. because it's permanent nature would encourage use. Right now, its permanent but not so permanent status is a barrier to use because one has to question whether its actually running at the time they're traveling. Making the  a permanent service and committing to providing the service regardless of how the  is that particular weekend removes that barrier.

Same here about having a third weekend 6th Avenue service. Though I’ve posted in the past about it being the . But I would be fine with the weekend  being made a permanent service.

Edited September 26, 2019 by T to Dyre Avenue

[CenSin]

Investigation on the Manhattan-bound stuck at Church Avenue. Unfortunately for those who were at Neck Road and Avenue U, the didn't wait at Kings Highway.

Edited September 27, 2019 by CenSin

[CenSin]

(Delete this; connectivity loss caused this double post.)

Edited September 27, 2019 by CenSin
Connectivity loss caused this double post.

[paulrivera]

The and seem to be running an extra train per hour thru Manhattan (7min headways each instead of 8.)

Normally they don't throw that bone to us when the  isnt running. Finally some progress is being made.

[shiznit1987]

On 9/25/2019 at 7:51 PM, Jemorie said:

Wrong. Subway ridership is down on weekends because alot of people are off from school and work with some exceptions such as public schools having Saturday school classes only for those who failed their regular classes the previous semester or previous marking period. Honestly, how the hell is that comparing chicken and egg? Also, I never said anything about reducing service further. I get that you are a highly an informative member of the forums, but nevertheless, the whole reason why I disagree with having the extended  is, once again, ridership. If you are traveling within a borough, no one will take the subway unless you don't have a car or unless you don't live near a bus line. Those who don't work or go to school will instead head out to shop, go to movies, visit friends/family, etc. But that all depends on where exactly they're going in those cases.

It isn't that world until the signals are all upgraded. Obviously it takes time. Using your logic, I could very well say that having the extended  like it currently is outside of the  shutdown is not part of that world either. At least, until the signals are upgraded, as I stated.

The  would not do any track and signal work if it weren't for relatively less ridership on weekends.

There may be less ridership overall but demand is still there. I disagree that people traveling locally will totally avoid the subway. People in places like ENY, Canarsie, Bensonhurst use the subway to get to DTBK all the time (Bus would be too long). Here in Queens tons of people hop the  from Jamaica to Forest Hills or Queens Center Mall. 

[shiznit1987]

On 9/26/2019 at 6:35 PM, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Same here about having a third weekend 6th Avenue service. Though I’ve posted in the past about it being the . But I would be fine with the weekend  being made a permanent service.

The ultimate of course would be to send it down QB when there's no GOs going on. Either that or bring back the weekend . Plenty of people looking to go to Brooklyn on weekends. 

[Missabassie]

On 5/29/2019 at 10:56 PM, brakethrow said:

I'm probably late on this but I just noticed R142 1205 has LED headlights

So its been around that long? I caught it by chance yesterday (Saturday) this is the first i've seen of this. Couldn't get a pic though....

[Missabassie]

Oh, forgot to mention, someone wanted to know if R42s run on weekends, well at least one batch was out yesterday (Saturday), maybe it'll be out again today.

Happy hunting

[paulrivera]

"TRACK MAINTENANCE
Oct 19 - 20, Saturday & Sunday
Trains run approximately every 12 minutes, days and evenings

service runs on a modified schedule because trains are running on a single track at Bedford Park Blvd in the Bronx."

By that logic, the and  need to run every 12 minutes also, because they run on a single track at 145 Street and Whitehall Street respectively.

Classic slippery slope scenario.

[S78 via Hylan]

4 minutes ago, paulrivera said:

"TRACK MAINTENANCE
Oct 19 - 20, Saturday & Sunday
Trains run approximately every 12 minutes, days and evenings

service runs on a modified schedule because trains are running on a single track at Bedford Park Blvd in the Bronx."

By that logic, the and  need to run every 12 minutes also, because they run on a single track at 145 Street and Whitehall Street respectively.

Classic slippery slope scenario.

Probably single tracking between Bedford Park Blvd and 205 St. 

[paulrivera]

Just now, S78 via Hylan said:

Probably single tracking between Bedford Park Blvd and 205 St. 

It's not running at all between Bedford and 205 that weekend.

[S78 via Hylan]

Just now, paulrivera said:

It's not running at all between Bedford and 205 that weekend.

Crud, I didn’t notice that.

[VIP]

So nobody caught that R160  train today? Just left 25 Avenue at 2:45pm Car Numbers 9117-9113. (Most likely a rerouted  train though).

[Calvin]

The R142s are starting to receive new Linear Induction Door Motors, similar to R142A 7775. 

1211-1215 is the first to receive them, more will come soon

Edited October 1, 2019 by Calvin

[Axis]

On 9/26/2019 at 6:35 PM, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Same here about having a third weekend 6th Avenue service. Though I’ve posted in the past about it being the . But I would be fine with the weekend  being made a permanent service.

Why not both? *assuming we’re anywhere close to anything that idealistic in the next hundred years*

[Jemorie]

On 9/26/2019 at 4:36 PM, RR503 said:

1) One of the things I've repeatedly objected to through the course of this conversation is NYCT's loading guidelines. They are quite literally myopic. I'd like them to increase service on some lines 'just because' because service increases happens to be one of the best ways of attracting new ridership (though this is contingent on there being ops funding avail for such moves). So the guideline point is absolutely correct relative to current conditions, but, much like adjacent track flagging, should not be seen as an immutable reality. 

2) I'd love it if we ran all those trains on weekends, but I also understand there are real-world trade-offs and constraints. Even in a world without ATF, you'd be hard pressed to fit more than 20-24 tph onto a single track during some "everyone via local" GO operation, so keeping the number of service variants down (ideally to a maximum of 3 services/corridor, which allows each to run at 6-8tph even under GO) is definitely a worthy goal. 

Loading guidelines (often called loading standards) are actually used by most major transit agencies. It's really the only way to ensure that operating funds are used equitably - without them, a very crowded line could easily end up with less service than a less crowded line, if the riders on the second line complain louder. Every line in the system currently gets as much service because of loads, plain and simple. Even if they are black and white, frequencies are determined by the most crowded points of any line.  On top of that, $$$ will cost the agency yearly. There are, of course, some exceptions, such as the . . . , , , and , which are much more crowded and more heavily loaded than the average guideline of 125% seated capacity during weekends at their most crowded points. As we both know, the most crowded points of any line in the system are before the CBDs no matter if it is rush hour, midday, evening, and weekend (overnight service doesn't count btw). For example, during the AM peak, the most crowded point on northbound  trains in Brooklyn is Lafayette Avenue and in Manhattan southbound at 72nd Street. If 480-feet long  trains are carrying more than 115 people per car, as per guidelines, then it should either be increased in terms of headway or train length. If every  train at the line's respective most crowded points is 145 people per car, than start off with full-length trains (R46) first, given that during the rush, the guideline load for 75 foot equipment on 7.5 minute headways and 10 minute headways, respectively, is 145 people per car, or 1,160 people per train. But as we both know,  and  line dispatchers will avoid making the  entirely R46s and the  half R32s at all cost for operational reasons. Why do you think they didn't want the swap to be made permanent year round instead of being exclusively only to the Summers of both 2011 and 2012?

In 2013, NYCT conducted a full review of the entire  route, and proved that service levels were within guidelines, particularly during the PM Rush, where trains on the line used to run every 10 minutes. Yet, they still increased service (but only slightly) at 8 minute headways (7.5 tph) instead of 10 minute headways (6 tph) and the only reason was to mesh properly with the 's 4 minute headway (15 tph). Otherwise, they would have not increase service at all. Same with the  and 's current headways, they are still the same as they were before the review for both lines came out, with a few exceptions, such as the  headways on early Sunday mornings being increased from 15-20 minutes to 10-12 minutes. Hardly any improvement came off the review for those two lines conducted in 2015, despite half of the 's fleet being NTTs with a few sets on the and more crews being added to the  on top of the crews already available on said line, as well as the recent construction project on the Rockaway Line shortly after Hurricane Sandy, and the rehab work on every single outdoor  train station inside and out. Generally, you can run as much service as you like, but only if loads are above guidelines. Remember, extra service means more crews and you have to pay them yearly, even with existing trains, that is still money being cost annually. That's why I specifically said you can't just run more service on any line in the system just because. That's not how it works. Do you, R5503, understand that now? And no, I don't think you understand completely that there are real world trade offs and constraints preventing service increases, expansions etc on weekends in NYC Subway.

Anyway, if the  is well above guideline due to people trying to connect to other lines to reach Midtown Manhattan instead of cramming onto the four-car  trains to Essex Street for the already packed , fine, extend the weekend  to 96th Street or better yet, Forest Hills (to avoid confusion and to be more simplistic). But only if it will bring average  train loads at Bedford Avenue northbound down to a minimum. The  already has its own crowds to deal with anyway, particularly those going straight to Chelsea and the areas along, around, or close to 14th Street. Otherwise, the weekend  stays where it currently is at Essex Street (outside of the  Canarsie Tube closure). Period.

Edited October 4, 2019 by Jemorie