Can SAS Phase 1 do the job?

[Gorgor]

Normal (and generally rational) commuters think only of efficiency.

 

I've been taking the during the morning rush for the past year (took the X90 before that), and I can definitely say that I miss having a seat, let alone personal space. Usually on the train I'm making contact with at least one other person, so anything to actually have room to breathe will be good.

[Tokkemon]

Then go take the express bus, or even better, a car service. Those extras come at a premium.

[Gorgor]

Then go take the express bus, or even better, a car service. Those extras come at a premium.

 

I used to take the express bus but the MTA killed it last year. Next year I plan on taking one of those Wall Street express vans though.

[SubwayGuy]

From 59th St to 42nd St will be crowded. And the SAS will not eliminate the need of the Lex.

 

Read what I wrote CAREFULLY:

 

Phase I will help reduce crowding on the most congested corridors between 42nd and 96th Streets on the Lex Line.

 

If completed, many UES riders would now have a one seat ride to midtown and midtown west...on the SAS, thus eliminating the need for them to use Lexington Avenue trains.

 

However, until SAS is completed in its entirety, the Wall St/Brooklyn Bridge/Fulton St crowd will continue to rely on the Lex line.

 

Of course, by the time that happens, more people will be in this city and there will be new patterns of overcrowding to overcome.

 

Reading comprehension is a fundamental skill that not too many people have these days.

 

Don't try and be a know it all when you haven't read, understood, and properly interpreted the meanings of all the words and phrases on the page

[SubwayGuy]

No, I'm a very nice person. But when people speak nonsense I try to explain to them the answer. Yet they keep pushing there opinion.

 

Good luck with that. I've been trying around these parts for quite some time with no avail.

 

Some would rather just live in fantasy land...

[SubwayGuy]

Normal (and generally rational) commuters think only of efficiency.

 

Many commuters don't though. My father routinely takes a lengthy crosstown bus ride over to the IND to avoid the Lexington Avenue line when going to his job in midtown. He's not the only one.

[SubwayGuy]

To address Gorgor's posts, when I ride the - assuming the train is running with proper headways - I can get a seat when I want it most of the time, even the AM rush. May have to wait one or two stations though.

 

It's manageable, but the problem is when there are delays on the line, everything goes to hell, and it would help a lot to have an alternative service sharing the load.

[Grand Concourse]

When I rode the like almost 10 years ago, at 86th I would have to stand till about 59th st where most were getting off at that station or to transfer to the Broadway lines below. It was there or 42nd where people were transfering or getting off that I was able to get a seat.

 

But I do agree that it was possible to get a seat on the , can't say about how it is now.

[Nova RTS 9147]

, doesn't matter, either way the one that is the Broadway express will go up to the SAS since the express is the only direct connection to 63rd St.

 

Personally I think it should be the since it has fewer stops and tends to be a bit infrequent [so the current 4 stops vs 9 would make the much shorter]. The could probably handle Astoria by itself, if the MTA doesn't want to bring back the .

 

Whichever line goes to SAS (and I totally see the deciding to send the via 2nd Avenue) needs to have increased service. Both lines run every ten minutes, which isn't acceptable in a part of town that isn't use to waiting more than five minutes on a weekday for transportation.

[Gorgor]

When I rode the like almost 10 years ago, at 86th I would have to stand till about 59th st where most were getting off at that station or to transfer to the Broadway lines below. It was there or 42nd where people were transfering or getting off that I was able to get a seat.

 

But I do agree that it was possible to get a seat on the , can't say about how it is now.

 

Well the from 86th all the way to Brooklyn Bridge takes literally twice as long (I've timed it before) as the assuming that there's no delays. However, it is unusual if there are no delays whatsoever.

 

At 86th Street the is much more crowded than the , and people are packed much tighter together in there. On the , you may be able to get a seat at 42nd Street, but you shouldn't count on it.

[Roadcruiser1]

Basically like sardines in a can. I have had been trying to point that out as I have rode the train for 5 years in the past.

[Caelestor]

Whichever line goes to SAS (and I totally see the deciding to send the via 2nd Avenue) needs to have increased service. Both lines run every ten minutes, which isn't acceptable in a part of town that isn't use to waiting more than five minutes on a weekday for transportation.

 

Hence why I argue that both the N and Q need to go onto the SAS to obtain that 5-minute headway, as there's no need to increase service on either one of the lines. Plus, the current switching delays on Broadway could be mostly avoided as well with the N/Q running express and the R/W(?) on the local tracks. Of course, a new frequent line would then be needed for Astoria, probably running to Whitehall St.

 

And regarding the original question, SAS phase 1 will definitely help, but SAS phase 2 is needed to fix most of the crowding on the UES. Also, I didn't know about the 125th St fault. That definitely complicates matters for a cross-town line through Harlem.

[Roadcruiser1]

So you are basically saying let the handle Astoria alone?

[Caelestor]

So you are basically saying let the handle Astoria alone?

 

Right now the N merges onto the B'way local tracks at Canal St, and the Q at 34th St, which is very messy. If the schedules are to be trusted, the R currently runs 8 or 9 tph at the height of rush hour through the 60th St tunnel, and the N and Q both run about 7 tph each. Thus, the W should be given 12 to 15 tph, the more the better. Running 20-24 tph along the B'way local should be feasible, as the line should be less delayed with the segregation of the express and local lines (see the IRT lines + 6th Ave lines).

[checkmatechamp13]

Right now the N merges onto the B'way local tracks at Canal St, and the Q at 34th St, which is very messy. If the schedules are to be trusted, the R currently runs 8 or 9 tph at the height of rush hour through the 60th St tunnel, and the N and Q both run about 7 tph each. Thus, the W should be given 12 to 15 tph, the more the better. Running 20-24 tph along the B'way local should be feasible, as the line should be less delayed with the segregation of the express and local lines (see the IRT lines + 6th Ave lines).

 

But the question is: Can Whitehall Street (keep in mind that it only has 1 track handle 12-15 TPH turning there, and would the risk getting backed up as trains pull into the station?

 

Maybe a solution would be to send some trains to terminate at, say 9th Avenue when the service gets backed up.

[Roadcruiser1]

If the is ever brought back, and you send the , and up to Second Avenue the would have to run from Bay Parkway to Astoria-Ditmars Boulevard at all times, because of the jamming of the Whitehall Street Station if the is terminated there, but you can terminate the new at Bay Ridge-95th Street, and 9th Avenue as well.

[Guest lance25]

Does it really matter where this hypothetical line terminates? No it doesn't because it doesn't exist yet. If and when Second Avenue opens (hopefully before I'm old and grey), then we can worry about what serves Astoria and what will run up to 96/125 St. Until then, most of us would appreciate it if talk about (W)s, <R>s and expansions of a line that only exists on paper to a minimum.

 

As to the original question, like others have stated, phase I will have an impact on the Lexington Avenue line, especially if riders are traveling crosstown since the (or whatever is sent up there) would run from the East Side to the West Side, thus eliminating the now-necessary transfer at (Lexington Av-)59 St.

[Grand Concourse]

Well the from 86th all the way to Brooklyn Bridge takes literally twice as long (I've timed it before) as the assuming that there's no delays. However, it is unusual if there are no delays whatsoever.

 

At 86th Street the is much more crowded than the , and people are packed much tighter together in there. On the , you may be able to get a seat at 42nd Street, but you shouldn't count on it.

 

As I said, this was based on my experience 10 years ago. I could care less about the , I rode them the first few months and gave up on waiting for an 'emptier' train[as in i can get in the damn car]. The is a local, but I left earlier and had more breathing room since more people were bound to get off and opening spots for me to move to. So even if I were to have taken the , it wouldn't have made a difference if I had to wait 3-4 trains to pass till I could get on. The at least wasn't that bad.

[Gorgor]

As I said, this was based on my experience 10 years ago. I could care less about the , I rode them the first few months and gave up on waiting for an 'emptier' train[as in i can get in the damn car]. The is a local, but I left earlier and had more breathing room since more people were bound to get off and opening spots for me to move to. So even if I were to have taken the , it wouldn't have made a difference if I had to wait 3-4 trains to pass till I could get on. The at least wasn't that bad.

 

Yeah I know, 10 years ago things were different, but in present day it's the opposite. A lot of the time you'll have to wait for an emptier train. A lot of the time a train will pull into the station and nobody will get out. There will already be people up against the doors and there's no room at all to get in. You'll never have to let a or go by if you go towards the back of the platform.

[Grand Concourse]

Ok then, but I don't think I'll be relying on the express during the rush hours because of how crowded they are. Middays and other times, the are fine.

[Rell]

1. Not Really: A point made earlier, the get plenty of crowd from Brooklyn & The Bronx. During the school year, I take the downtown to 125 for an uptown . Usually between Morrison Av-Soundview and Hunts Point Av all the seats are taken, and definitely by 125 St there's little space at all. And let's not get started with the uptown . Doesn't even clear out until between Burnside Av and Fordham Rd. And this is 7AM to 8AM. And PM Rush is definitely no better. However, the uptown (5)s during PM Rush tend to be emptier than the other lines.

 

2. A Little Bit: While the definitely has good headways (4-6 minutes during rush hrs. compared to the 6-12 min. (N)/(Q) headway), the riders living between 2nd Av and the FDR will save walking time and therefore would negate the headway issue.

 

3. Yes (Easier Travel to/from UES):

Easier ((M)/PATH access via 63 St or Herald Sq (avoids OOS transfer at 59 and downtown-only transfer at Bleeker on the Lex).

Easier Midtown/Midtown West/(1)(3)/(A) access via Times Sq.

Easier Brooklyn/BMT Brighton/Coney Island access via .

 

-- Going to 125 St (Phase II) might negate some of the help though, because it'd lessen the UES crowding from 68-Hunter Coll to 116 St, but focus that crowding to 125 St. Easier connection to MNRR though. Phases III/IV would help a lot more, but I wonder if they'd make it.

[SubwayGuy]

Yeah I know, 10 years ago things were different, but in present day it's the opposite. A lot of the time you'll have to wait for an emptier train. A lot of the time a train will pull into the station and nobody will get out. There will already be people up against the doors and there's no room at all to get in. You'll never have to let a or go by if you go towards the back of the platform.

 

I ride the line damn near every day and I never have to wait for a second train unless their is a service interruption or a long headway of more than 7 minutes due to heavy ridership elsewhere.

 

train comes in 6 minutes or less, I always get on the first one. Present day, in the UES.

 

Doesn't mean it's perfect (far from it), but it's not as bad as you're suggesting

[Grand Concourse]

Thank you. I can't believe it is worse on the compared to the lines. Those two lines together, I still had to let 3-4 trains pass till i can squeeze onto the next train.

[Roadcruiser1]

The Lexington Avenue Line is sadly an example of a subway line in the city of Tokyo, or East Asia. It's so crowded I can use photos to compare.

 

train during rush hour on the Lexington Avenue Line.

 

Rush hour train in Taipei.

 

Now tell me. Isn't the Lexington Avenue Line a flavor of Asia in the City of New York?

[Gorgor]

Except the people in the 2nd picture aren't physically touching others. In front of that girl in the blue shirt... I see space for at least 2 more people to stand.