Guest lance25 Posted December 13, 2011 Share #151 Posted December 13, 2011 That problem could be solved by adding a train that would operate 4-5 tph daytime and 2tph nights between Chambers and 168 that can supplement the ©/(E). Other thing I would do is have the be the train that joins the in Brooklyn (with the replacing the to Euclid), with the replacing the as the Culver Local UNLESS as part of this, the is shortened to Church Avenue and the heads to Coney Island (with select trains running peak-hour express to Kings Highway running express between there and Church Avenue). The idea is to add service without either breaking the bank or screwing over the rest of the system. Bringing in a would require more crews, more trains, etc. While it's an interesting idea to have both 6th and 8th Avenue serving Culver, having the run all the way to Euclid while maintaining its current headways would again require more trains and crews. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asidrane Posted December 13, 2011 Share #152 Posted December 13, 2011 As someone who grew up in Park Slope with the 7th Ave. F stop as my local stop, I always wondered about the express tracks and hoped that they would some day be reactivated. Now that I've learned a little about the system, I see that the concept of an express train along the Culver line really doesn't make much sense. At 7th. Ave. you skip three stops and Church Ave. riders get five skipped stops in total. The benefits of increasing two stops' travel times 6-8 minutes do not make up for the increased cost, scheduling issues, etc... Logistically speaking, and express G would work, however, that would be fairly useless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lance25 Posted December 13, 2011 Share #153 Posted December 13, 2011 The Crosstown tracks don't connect to the express tracks except between Smith-9 Sts & 4 Av and just south of Church Av. Your express would skip a grand total of three stops, one of which is the only transfer point to the south Brooklyn lines. Then there's the idea of what you're trying to accomplish. The idea behind a Culver express service isn't just to put those express tracks back in service. It's to provide faster service into and out of Manhattan. No one's going to hop from an train at Church to the express and then jump back to the at Smith, Carroll or Bergen. Chances are, they're going to meet the same train at both points, resulting in a net time savings of exactly zero. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CenSin Posted December 13, 2011 Share #154 Posted December 13, 2011 Right now, the primary reason for putting the express tracks to use would be capacity. The is not going away, so extra service will have to be carried on another pair of tracks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted December 13, 2011 Share #155 Posted December 13, 2011 Any idea to extend the Culver Express by using the would fail, because the people on the Culver Line want Manhattan service. They don't want service to Queens so they don't want the . The idea has been tried with the in the 70's and 80's and it failed miserably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VWM Posted December 13, 2011 Share #156 Posted December 13, 2011 The idea has been tried with the in the 70's and 80's and it failed miserably. I wonder why.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted December 13, 2011 Share #157 Posted December 13, 2011 I wonder why.... Can't you read someone's explanation above you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VWM Posted December 13, 2011 Share #158 Posted December 13, 2011 Can't you read someone's explanation above you? Duh, Sarcasm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asidrane Posted December 14, 2011 Share #159 Posted December 14, 2011 I know that the express G is not a useful train, in fact I said that. I was simply saying that the G was the only train that could use those tracks without seriously impacting the rest of the 6th and/or 8th ave lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted December 14, 2011 Share #160 Posted December 14, 2011 I know that the express G is not a useful train, in fact I said that. I was simply saying that the G was the only train that could use those tracks without seriously impacting the rest of the 6th and/or 8th ave lines. The line can't use the express tracks even if they wanted to, because it has no way to access them. Here is the track map. The only has access to the local tracks up above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CenSin Posted December 14, 2011 Share #161 Posted December 14, 2011 The line can't use the express tracks even if they wanted to, because it has no way to access them. Here is the track map. The only has access to the local tracks up above. Sometimes I feel like I've read these posts a thousand times, but this proves that some people don't read no matter how many times it's been said… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.