Culver Line/Smith-9th Station Rehab Thread

[Brighton Express]

can skip Av U and Terminate at Av X, and if that service was in place there would most likely be a Kings Highway or even to Coney Island

 

But this would block up the traffic, wouldn't it?

[Roadcruiser1]

can skip Av U and Terminate at Av X, and if that service was in place there would most likely be a Kings Highway or even to Coney Island

 

I won't really use that idea since the tracks lead to the yards and it would delay the movement of trains. That's why I didn't use that idea. Besides all the express F GO's have their last express stop at Kings Highway not Avenue X.

[Roadcruiser1]

I did however took some time to make a map of what it would look like.

 

[Brighton Express]

I still think all Express South of Church Avenue will not work.

[Roadcruiser1]

I still think all Express South of Church Avenue will not work.

 

It would. The line is usually crowded with people, and in the summertime it would provide a fast way to go to Coney Island while allowing people to have a faster trip to Manhattan.

[Guest Lance]

Express service is more than just a faster ride into and out of Manhattan. It's about balancing passenger flow and keeping service patterns as tight as possible. Express service means absolutely dick if the trains are running damn near empty. That's why the Jerome express pilot and the W-diamond in Queens failed. It's also pretty damn useless if the local riders have to suffer at the expense of the relatively few riders coming out of Coney Island. Like I said before, Culver north of Kings Hwy enjoys 15tph service levels during the rush hours. Creating any type of express service on Culver (north of Church, south of Church or both) would diminish those nice headways to eight minutes (if using the 1:1 express/local ratio) and while that may be alright for Brighton (probably because they're used to those wait times), it's not cool for folks who are used to that relatively nice service. And, as I've also previously stated before, reducing the amount of express trains will reduce the reliability of said express service. For the sake of argument, let's say this Culver express (Avenue X to Jay St-MetroTech) shaves about 15 minutes off a Manhattan-bound trip. Using a 2:1 local/express ratio (that's one express train every 12 minutes for those not mathematically inclined) and not accounting for any other changes in the schedules of the F-line or any other service, you can easily see how the wait times and the time saved basically even out. And that's not accounting for any delays or mishaps on any of the lines the F-trains use.

 

You see, this is why most ideas for the Culver express were shelved after June 28^th, 2010. Without the dead-ending V-line to serve as the secondary 6th Avenue-Culver local service, there isn't really a feasible way to create a Culver express without impeding on the Culver local or the M-line riders. And we all know Myrtle Avenue and Jamaica riders are about as likely to give up their newly created one-seat ride to midtown Manhattan as the Second Avenue subway reaching lower Manhattan by the end of the decade. You can't reduce the amount of M-trains on Sixth Avenue to fit more F-trains because the former already runs at suckish headways and you can't simply add more F-trains because both Sixth Avenue and Queens Blvd are close to capacity with the current signalling system.

 

And because I know someone will ask this, no I don't have any real ideas on how to improve Culver service outside of hoping CBTC is expedited along the F-line's tracks. Other than that, these are the benefits of running a 20^th century transit system for a 21^st century city.

[Roadcruiser1]

Like I said before though the best idea would be to have a connection from the Second Avenue Subway. Even though I don't like to talk about it it sounds like the only option available on the table right now without the E or the V. Sending the T down there would give it a connection to the Coney Island Yard, give an equal amount of TPH to local and express service, it would give Brooklyn riders direct access to the East Side, and the Second Avenue Subway would be connected to Brooklyn reducing the amount of people that would need to transfer. Also unlike the current proposal a proposal like this would use existing infrastructure. You won't need to drill a tunnel to connect the Second Avenue Subway to Brooklyn at least for quite a while. There are still no existing infrastructure to allow it to go to the Bronx so that is still a problem, but right now I am offering the cheapest solution. The MTA should look into this if they ever start phase 3.

[Brighton Express]

Like I said before though the best idea would be to have a connection from the Second Avenue Subway. Even though I don't like to talk about it it sounds like the only option available on the table right now without the E or the V. Sending the T down there would give it a connection to the Coney Island Yard, give an equal amount of TPH to local and express service, it would give Brooklyn riders direct access to the East Side, and the Second Avenue Subway would be connected to Brooklyn reducing the amount of people that would need to transfer.

 

 

Spechless.

 

Well I was chatting with TwoTimer today, and he came up with something that I really like. After 4 Av, the goes Express, and switches Local on the other side, kind of like the Prospect Park situation. Everyone says 4 Av is important, well the Smith St. tracks will help a brother out to get there. The will run on it, stopping at Bergen Street, and then Jay Street. If you want anything in between, get off at 4 Av for the , or Bergen Street for the . I think it is a great idea. Lance, Roadcrusier1, haters can hate.

[Roadcruiser1]

Spechless.

 

Well I was chatting with TwoTimer today, and he came up with something that I really like. After 4 Av, the goes Express, and switches Local on the other side, kind of like the Prospect Park situation. Everyone says 4 Av is important, well the Smith St. tracks will help a brother out to get there. The will run on it, stopping at Bergen Street, and then Jay Street. If you want anything in between, get off at 4 Av for the , or Bergen Street for the . I think it is a great idea. Lance, Roadcrusier1, haters can hate.

 

 

But that is the original 1970-1980 configuration. It won't work since the Culver riders want direct access to Manhattan.

[bstar1]

They should have Culver Local services to Coney Island & ( Culver Express to Kings Highway for AM/PM peak direction rush hours only).

[NX Express]

Don't expresses usually run further than locals (B to Brighton is the exception)?

[Roadcruiser1]

They should have Culver Local services to Coney Island & ( Culver Express to Kings Highway for AM/PM peak direction rush hours only).

 

 

Again read what is stated above. The people on the Culver Line aren't used to that sort of timing.

[ACEVE14]

The best solution would be similar to the 7 line. There would be a diamond F and a normal F.

 

I made this a few months back. This is how express service would work on the Culver Line. No farther explanation is needed since it's on the image.

 

 

Wait, don't you mean that "Kings Highway is the terminal for all local trains"? From my point of view, the Trains running in Brooklyn

might be split into 2 services running all weekday long: 1 would be running regular service between Jamaica-179th St, Queens and Kings Highway, Brooklyn. The other would be running the same as the local, but it will run express in Brooklyn between Bergen St and Kings Highway, then runs local between it and Coney Island-Stillwell Av, problem solved. I think.

[Roadcruiser1]

Wait, don't you mean that "Kings Highway is the terminal for all local trains"? From my point of view, the Trains running in Brooklyn

might be split into 2 services running all weekday long: 1 would be running regular service between Jamaica-179th St, Queens and Kings Highway, Brooklyn. The other would be running the same as the local, but it will run express in Brooklyn between Bergen St and Kings Highway, then runs local between it and Coney Island-Stillwell Av, problem solved. I think.

 

 

Again express trains on the Culver Line even during GO's terminate at Kings Highway. That way it won't create problems for trains going to the Yard.

[Brighton Express]

I still think that they should hit the express past 4th Av in both directions, stopping at Bergen. It would work out great. You need a transfer? Get off at 4th Av or Bergen Street for the .

[NX Express]

Skipping what? Two stops? That would be useless.

[Brighton Express]

Could clear up some of the traffic, run a little smoother. But it works.

[Guest Lance]

The is too damn infrequent to be a viable alternative for local riders. Then there's the fact that it uses 4-car trains. Those trains will get packed real fast.

 

Besides, any plan to use the lower level of Bergen St is DOA. Even if the dream of a Culver Express is realized, Bergen St is likely to remain as a local stop only.

 

Also, like NX said, there's no point of the skipping Carroll St and Smith-9 Sts in the first place. It's not saving any time at all. In fact, all that switching would probably have the opposite effect, delaying both the and trains in the area.

[Brighton Express]

I'll be damned, any express service south is not going to work.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

I would be in favor of express service between Jay and Church as long as the G is not the only local service. There has to be a local train that serves Manhattan along with the express. There are folks on here who say the M on 6th Ave precludes the operation of an F Express/V Local service (or F Local/V Express, take your pick). I disagree with that statement. Currently, there are 15 F and 8 M trains during the rush. That's 23 tph. How is that almost "at capacity" (30 tph)?

 

Before the F got rerouted to the 63rd St tunnel, it ran 18 tph and the E ran 12. I propose going back to the 12/18 E/F split. Then I propose making 11 of those 18 trains local to Church Ave and the other seven trains express from Jay to Church, then local to CI. Local trains to/from Church would retain the letter F and express trains to/from CI would get the letter V. To make up for thr loss of the three E's that would be given over to the combined F/V service, I'd route the V trains through the 53rd St tunnel with the E and M. That would be 12 E's, 8 M's and 7 V's, so 27 tph in the 53rd St Tunnel. It would also be 26 tph on the 6th Ave Local tracks with 11 F's, 8 M's and 7 V's. It may be a little tight, but it's not impossible. And headways on the F-only stops in Brooklyn may be somewhat infrequent with 11 tph. I would suggest running 12 F's, but then it would be 19 tph on the combined F/V service and 31 tph on the Queens Blvd express tracks when the 12 E's are added in. The signals may not be able to handle even just one more train per hour over the current 30. Or can they?

[Brighton Express]

Then I propose

making 11 of those 18 trains local to Church Ave and the other seven trains express from Jay to Church, then local to CI.

 

 

This isn't Brighton , everyone doesn't get off at Church Avenue. And lots of people get off at 4th Avenue for the , usually to get the or .

 

And I doubt that the will be coming back, because can the 6 Av Local really handle 3 lines?

[T to Dyre Avenue]

You can't rebuild 4th Ave/9th St into an express stop. And do most of the riders who get on the F south of Church want the R? Can they not get the R at Jay? Or the D at Broadway/Lafayette? There are other local stations that are transfer points. Columbus Circle, 51st St and Bleecker are three of them. It would be too expensive and time-consuming to rebuild them all into express stops.

[Roadcruiser1]

I highly doubt the will make a comeback. It would again be an express , and just like what T to Dyre Avenue said these stations will never be rebuilt to be express stations. If it's needed people will transfer. Transferring is good. Too many people expect to ride directly to their destinations. It's not that much of a hassle to transfer, and I also believe that the express would be popular through the Culver Line from Coney Island to Bergen Street. It would save time and it would allow people to move to their destinations faster. Unlike the Sea Beach Line or the West End Line which is a short line the Culver Line is pretty long and many people on the line would like a faster way to get to the destination. It's sort of like a Brighton Line without express service. It is needed to allow people to move with ease.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

The V in my proposal is basically an express . It's like the express service that ran on the Brighton Line from 2001 to 2004. You can run three services on the 6th Avenue Local tracks, as long as you don't run more than 30 tph and you don't have any switching at West 4th Street or Herald Square. My proposal calls for 26-27 combined F/M/V trains between Rock Center and Broadway/Lafayette. I think that's reasonable.

[Threxx]

I'll be damned, any express service south is not going to work.

 

 

1. I believe I came up with EXP service past 4th Avenue.

2. It can work, there is a switch after Smith-9th to allow it.

 

@NX: It would be useful. It would clear up and speed up along a non-busy corridor. (Carroll-Smith-9th)

 

@Lance: The uses 6 car trains, not four anymore. All the would need is a few extra runs.