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.
Sign in to follow this  
Harry

Sorry G riders no improvements this time around

Recommended Posts

The (G) line, which was scheduled for increased service last December did not make the cut for this round of improvements. According to the (MTA), the (G) line does not exceed the loading guidelines.

 

The biggest complaints on the (G) line is the long wait times. An increase in service would have cut wait times.

 

The lines that will or should see improvements are (1)(2)(3)(4)(6)(7) and the (:P(J)(M)(N)(Q)(W) lines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they need to send G trains to 71st on weekends !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

and not like once every 5 weekends, i mean every weekend !!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The public needs to use the (G) even more so that improvements can be done with the line. If everyone does their part and use it as much as possible I'm sure the MTA would add more service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The public needs to use the (G) even more so that improvements can be done with the line. If everyone does their part and use it as much as possible I'm sure the MTA would add more service.

 

I was on it yesterday.....does that count!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was on it yesterday.....does that count!!

 

Yes! I was working in Greenpoint for a few weeks and I used it as much as I could. :cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No what you guys really need to do is Write Letters to the (MTA) non stop like they did on the (:P(W) Lines. They don't care if ridership does pick up they only act on lots of customer complaints.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the (G) has to be extended, in my opinion, they would go on the (F) to Kings Highway via the Culver Line, therefore it will increase frequency of service via the Culver line between Kings Highway and Bergen Streets with the (F) to/from Manhattan and (G) to/from Queens

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No what you guys really need to do is Write Letters to the (MTA) non stop like they did on the (:P(W) Lines. They don't care if ridership does pick up they only act on lots of customer complaints.

 

Customers actually wrote complaint letters about the (W) and not the (G). Then thats the problem right there customers that don't care about their service on the (G).

 

Bill (NYCT)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(MTA) only care about $$$$ not their workers, customers nor thier subways and buses. The subway sucks half the time, buses runs like crap most of the time and half of them need Limited service. MTA just don't care period and they have the nerve to raise fares again next year. When is this going to stop?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My theory is that the only reason that the (G) is constantly railroaded is because of the flaws it consists of. The namely flaw that I hold responsible is that it does not run through Manhattan at all. At current, the only real line ((S) does not count) that does not reach the busiest borough in New York.

 

I do think that if they make changes to that and allow for the (G) to see some service in Manhattan, then the (G) line will acquire more respect from (MTA)(NYCT).

 

If anyone should want change, start there and surely the rest will follow suit. Mark my words.

 

SPOILER ALERT: This could be the sparks for anew thread. Stay tuned!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The (MTA) neglects the (G), because it doesn't enter Manhattan. I agree 100%, but the people who neglect that train fail to realize that the two boroughs that it enters (Brooklyn and Queens) have the highest populations that any of the other boroughs, in addition to most cities. In fact, if Brooklyn was it's own city, It would be like the 3rd or 4th most populated in the country. Wake up (MTA), the people that flood Manhattan have to be coming from somewhere.

 

The (G) should go deeper into Brooklyn, if not all the way to Kings Highway, at least to Church, so the connection with the (R) is possible at 4th Avenue. And also, the (MTA) should follow it's map, and extend to Forest Hills when the (V) isn't running. Add some importance to the line. It's so annoying to try to get to a local stop on Queen Blvd, when coming from the (G), cause you have to get the (E) and then get to the (R). That's 3 trains instead of just putting the (G) where it should go, based on the service plan!

 

(Sorry, the (G) train struck a nerve)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

(Sorry, the (G) train struck a nerve)

 

No needs feeling sorry, dude. You might have just saved me from creating another thread on this matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah the people in Astoria kicked up about the (W) and the people in Bklyn wrote letters about the (:P because transfering at 34 St between the (D)(Q) is an inconvenance. At least thats the story I was giving.

I believe in the Future you will see (G) Service Extended to Church Ave. However right now they can to make Court SQ the Northern Terminal because Continenal has a hard time handling (G)(R)(V) Trains at the same time. All I can tell you from personal experance when I worked the (R)(V) Lines the wait to CTL terminal started at 63 Drive. Those where my Extra List days and I try to aviod the QNS BLVD Lines at all cost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, at least on the weekends when the (V) isn't in service, the (G) should run to Forest Hills. If they don't want to do that, take it off the map...which they won't do cause that's a permanent change and would cause problems with the riders. So, the "Until Further Notice" is all they do.

And 34th Street from the (D) to the (Q) is an awfully big station, and so it Court House Sq to transfer from the (G) to Queens Blvd, so I think the riders have a right to complain.

 

But, thank you for a train operators take.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Riders have a right to complain especially when they get the short end of the stick. I also don't understand the problems on the Wkends unless they worried about those construction projects that require all service on one track.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a kick in the balls right there. Ouch man. The (G) don't deserve this! It a very vital line especially since it doesn't go to Manhattan. I mean it why better then anyone thinks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're rebuilding the Culver viaduct from 2009-2012... does anybody think that they'll extend (G) service to Church then?

 

My theory is that the only reason that the (G) is constantly railroaded is because of the flaws it consists of. The namely flaw that I hold responsible is that it does not run through Manhattan at all. At current, the only real line ((S) does not count) that does not reach the busiest borough in New York.

 

I do think that if they make changes to that and allow for the (G) to see some service in Manhattan, then the (G) line will acquire more respect from (MTA)(NYCT).

 

Just a thought on this... sending the (G) into Manhattan would involve abandoning quite a few stations along the Crosstown line (ironic in a way since it doesn't cross Manhattan or even enter it) unless some other train replaces it, new stations are built, new switches connect tracks to the current (G) tracks, or terminals are changed. It's not gonna happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just a thought on this... sending the (G) into Manhattan would involve abandoning quite a few stations along the Crosstown line (ironic in a way since it doesn't cross Manhattan or even enter it) unless some other train replaces it, new stations are built, new switches connect tracks to the current (G) tracks, or terminals are changed. It's not gonna happen.

 

No, it might not happen but yes, it should happen. Withthe (G) not traveling to Manhattan, it sends a message that it is not a dominant line in the (MTA) system.

 

Granted, if the (G) operators and the passengers that ride that line wanted to, then they could write letters and demand that the (G) see some mileage in Mhtn. There could be another train to pull some foot work for the (G).

 

So if the letters wrack up, then the TA would make the move for Manhattan-Bound (G) service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, it might not happen but yes, it should happen. Withthe (G) not traveling to Manhattan, it sends a message that it is not a dominant line in the (MTA) system.

 

Granted, if the (G) operators and the passengers that ride that line wanted to, then they could write letters and demand that the (G) see some mileage in Mhtn. There could be another train to pull some foot work for the (G).

 

So if the letters wrack up, then the TA would make the move for Manhattan-Bound (G) service.

 

I thinking about what you guys was saying about the (G) going to Manhatan to get some respect. This plan might never happen but his my idea,

Chould the (MTA) built a new underground platform level at Queens Plaza so the (G) can transfer to the (E),(V),(R) and possable future transfer with the (N)(W) and (7)? Then in my idea the (G) turns and connect with the 63th street tunnel to go to Manhattan. Then the (G) to the 2nd ave subway and connects with the (T). The (G) than turns in to the 2nd ave express service. With the (G) making express stops at 55th st (Transfer to the (E)(V)(T)),42 st((T)(4)(5)(6)(7) Metro North, LIRR),14 st((L)(T)),Houston Street ((F)(V)(T)),Grand Street((B)(D) and possable (J)(M)(Z) transfer). Than ends in Lower manhattan or goes back into Brooklyn.

As I said this expensive plan will never happen. It is all ways go to dream right? ;)What do you guys think about my idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I thinking about what you guys was saying about the (G) going to Manhatan to get some respect. This plan might never happen but his my idea,

Chould the (MTA) built a new underground platform level at Queens Plaza so the (G) can transfer to the (E),(V),(R) and possable future transfer with the (N)(W) and (7)? Then in my idea the (G) turns and connect with the 63th street tunnel to go to Manhattan. Then the (G) to the 2nd ave subway and connects with the (T). The (G) than turns in to the 2nd ave express service. With the (G) making express stops at 55th st (Transfer to the (E)(V)(T)),42 st((T)(4)(5)(6)(7) Metro North, LIRR),14 st((L)(T)),Houston Street ((F)(V)(T)),Grand Street((B)(D) and possable (J)(M)(Z) transfer). Than ends in Lower manhattan or goes back into Brooklyn.

As I said this expensive plan will never happen. It is all ways go to dream right? ;)What do you guys think about my idea.

 

Lets see...

 

Another platform at Queens Plaza might not happen because the (F) goes to 63rd St before Queens Plaza. But then again, it's completely plausible for them to do that. The only problem would be tunneling under building foundations.

 

If there were a free transfer between the (N)(W)(7) and (E)(R)(V) platforms it would be there right now. It would be very convenient but it probably won't happen, even though the stations are practically on top of each other.

 

The 2nd Avenue line is going to be two tracked for its entire route so there won't be capacity for an express service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anything I would like to see the (G) connect with the Triboro Rx at some point and then enter the Bronx, and go to Kings Highway in Brooklyn at all times. Allows the (F) to go express much of the time. The Triboro Rx in my ideal world would have three trains (G)(M)(K). The (K) is the Triboro Line from Yankee Stadium to Bay Ridge. The (G)(M) would run under 3rd Avenue / Webster Avenue up to Williamsbridge. It would be connected to the Second Avenue Line (N) train (I would have the (Q) go to Astoria again) go to Co-Op City via 3rd / Webster / Gun Hill Road.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The plan is going forward to extend the (G) further south to the Church Avenue station late 2008 or early 2009. It is still not known if the change will be permanent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if the Church Avenue extension passes will there be express service for the F, then a permanent terminal for the (G) at Court Square that would really suck for weekend riders on the Queens Line, even though they're already smacked around since they almost never run there anymore on weekends...

 

The easiest way to make the (G) go to Manhattan is to build a track connection at Hoyt Schermerhorn to the (A)/© then have the (G) Terminate at Chambers Street, but it would cut off service from Bergen to Smith-9th, leaving the F stuck serving them, and then screwing up service around there, ah! Missing connections from Bergen to Hoyt! Then again, riders can always transfer at Borough Hall..

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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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