Culver Line/Smith-9th Station Rehab Thread

[Roadcruiser1]

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.

 

Again. This idea was used in the 1970's and 1980's and FAILED. Why would you say that it would work when it has been tried and failed?

[VWM]

What if Local : Express ratio south of Church was 2:1?

10 Local Culver Trains. 6 Minutes apart each.

5 Express <F> Culver Trains. 12 Minutes Apart Each.

[Brighton Express]

What if Local : Express ratio south of Church was 2:1?

10 Local Culver Trains. 6 Minutes apart each.

5 Express <F> Culver Trains. 12 Minutes Apart Each.

 

 

6 MINS!?

 

Dang is it just me, or is that why I wait so long for a damn at Cortelyou.

[Roadcruiser1]

The best idea would be to have the order more R179's then the current order as of now if the express service is implemented. That way express and local service will have extremely close or have exactly the same timing. If the uses my plan the or whatever Second Avenue Subway service is ever connected down there will have extra subway cars that could run on the or the specific subway line that would go down there.

[Brighton Express]

The best idea would be to have the order more R179's then the current order as of now if the express service is implemented. That way express and local service will have extremely close or have exactly the same timing. If the uses my plan the or whatever Second Avenue Subway service is ever connected down there will have extra subway cars that could run on the or the specific subway line that would go down there.

 

 

Buddy, they are NEVER going to connect the 2 Av Subway to the Culver Express. They may in the future because of population growth, but I doubt that will happen in our lifetime. All they have to do is go Express with the past 4 Av. Skip Bergen. Use it as a Utility platform of something. We can handle the passing Smith St., Carrol Street, and Bergen Street. Atleast use that for the beginning.

 

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

 

 

I believe TwoTimer came up with that idea on the chat. And I really like it. The could skip those stations, there is not that many people getting on, right?

[Wallyhorse]

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.

 

Perhaps if they tacked on enough additional R179s to the order that is supposed to happen to accommodate a Culver Express it could be done, either with the as you suggested OR as I would do it with:

 

The re-routed from 8th Avenue south of West 4th to the at Broadway-Lafayette (to avoid doing the crossover at Jay Street), with the going to Coney Island as the Culver Express and the terminating with the at Church Avenue (except overnights, when the would run to CI as it does now).

 

The replacing the from Chambers-Euclid Avenue (except overnights, when it would terminate at Chambers as it does now).

 

A new train that would be a 3-4tph supplement running from Chambers-168th (mainly for those looking for Spring, and stations between 23rd-50th from Chambers, also except overnights).

 

My plan makes the Culver Express an 8th Avenue line, giving Coney Island riders a new 8th Avenue option they don't currently have with those from CI-Ditmas looking for 6th Avenue still able to get the at CI OR along the Culver branch taking the to an empty train at Church Avenue. At the same time, Park Slope riders looking for 8th Avenue if at an express stop can simply take the OR can switch to the from the (F)/ at an express stop (which actually then enhances the need for the to Church since it would be a second line from which Park Slope riders looking for/coming from 8th Avenue can switch to/from).

 

(And yes, I would renovate the lower level of Bergen Street so it can be an express stop).

 

That said, they would likely need to tack on enough extra cars to the R179 order to handle such service changes, meaning they probably are at best a few years off, if ever given from what I've read there being a car shortage.

[N4 Via Merrick Rd]

Buddy, they are NEVER going to connect the 2 Av Subway to the Culver Express. They may in the future because of population growth, but I doubt that will happen in our lifetime. All they have to do is go Express with the past 4 Av. Skip Bergen. Use it as a Utility platform of something. We can handle the passing Smith St., Carrol Street, and Bergen Street. Atleast use that for the beginning.

 

its NOT going to happen PERIOD

[Threxx]

Again. This idea was used in the 1970's and 1980's and FAILED. Why would you say that it would work when it has been tried and failed?

 

 

That was then. This is now. Things have changed, and more people take the further south.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

@Wallyhorse: But do a majority of Coney Island and Culver el riders want 8th Ave? They have never had 8th Ave service (8th Avenue service never went any further south than Church Ave). They may prefer the convenience of being connected directly to the 6th Ave Line. Would they really want to lose that in favor of being shifted two avenue blocks west (not exactly a short distance)? Sure, they can transfer at Jay, but don't they already do that now if they want 8th Ave?

[Roadcruiser1]

That was then. This is now. Things have changed, and more people take the further south.

 

 

No. It won't work because people don't want the as a local service. The doesn't take them to Manhattan. That is why it failed and it will not work again.

 

To make it easy for you. They want a local service that takes them to Manhattan and an express service that takes them to Manhattan not a local service that doesn't take them to Manhattan and an express service that takes them to Manhattan.

[Threxx]

No. It won't work because people don't want the as a local service. The doesn't take them to Manhattan. That is why it failed and it will not work again.

 

To make it easy for you. They want a local service that takes them to Manhattan and an express service that takes them to Manhattan not a local service that doesn't take them to Manhattan and an express service that takes them to Manhattan.

 

 

The will stop at 4th so you can transfer to the and not have to wait until Jay. Not many people use Smith or Carroll, so we would be affecting as little people as possible.

 

Why are you so against change?

[Brighton Express]

its NOT going to happen PERIOD

 

 

It can, seeing what has been going on with the tracks now, we could see an extension, but far into the future.

 

The will stop at 4th so you can transfer to the and not have to wait until Jay. Not many people use Smith or Carroll, so we would be affecting as little people as possible.

 

Why are you so against change?

 

 

THANK YOU.

 

Why don't you people want Express past 4th Av. You want Local, hop on the at 4th Av or Bergen Street. Skeed.

[Roadcruiser1]

The will stop at 4th so you can transfer to the and not have to wait until Jay. Not many people use Smith or Carroll, so we would be affecting as little people as possible.

 

Why are you so against change?

 

 

THANK YOU.

 

Why don't you people want Express past 4th Av. You want Local, hop on the at 4th Av or Bergen Street. Skeed.

 

 

4th Avenue can't be converted into an express station. How many times have we told you guys this? THE CULVER EXPRESS CONFIGURATION WAS BUILT BY THE IND SO THAT FOURTH AVENUE IS A LOCAL STATION. THEREFORE IT CAN'T BE CONVERTED INTO AN EXPRESS STATION. In basic architecture and engineering you are taught that once it's built the way it is it can't be modified unless if it was built for modifications. In this case it can't be modified therefore Fourth Avenue will remain a local station. You can't convert local into express and express into local.

 

And again I told you people are refusing to transfer. You guys want to do something? How about listening to the majority?

 

Also I am not against change. As long as it is possible. There is a limit from reality to fantasy. Fantasy are things that will never happen. The reality is thing that could happen because it is logical.

[Roadcruiser1]

The perfect configuration would be a local and an express . More trains will be ordered for the hopefully R179's or R211's that would keep the local and the express with similar or almost similar timing. The would increase the amount of trains running on the local tracks on Sixth Avenue to 30 TPH making the local tracks full. The would run local along with the local while the would run express in the center tracks at all times. Past Church Avenue the trains would run peak directional similar to the configuration which works. This is the plan that should be implemented.

[Threxx]

4th Avenue can't be converted into an express station. How many times have we told you guys this? THE CULVER EXPRESS CONFIGURATION WAS BUILT BY THE IND SO THAT FOURTH AVENUE IS A LOCAL STATION. THEREFORE IT CAN'T BE CONVERTED INTO AN EXPRESS STATION. In basic architecture and engineering you are taught that once it's built the way it is it can't be modified unless if it was built for modifications. In this case it can't be modified therefore Fourth Avenue will remain a local station. You can't convert local into express and express into local.

 

And again I told you people are refusing to transfer. You guys want to do something? How about listening to the majority?

 

Also I am not against change. As long as it is possible. There is a limit from reality to fantasy. Fantasy are things that will never happen. The reality is thing that could happen because it is logical.

 

 

DO YOU THINK WE (me and trainguy) WANT TO REBUILD 4TH AVENUE? (You brought out the caps, so no holds barred.) The would switch onto the express tracks after 4th. What is not clear about that???

 

And who is this "we" you speak of? You're the only one whose been dead set against it.

 

The perfect configuration would be a local and an express . More trains will be ordered for the hopefully R179's or R211's that would keep the local and the express with similar or almost similar timing. The would increase the amount of trains running on the local tracks on Sixth Avenue to 30 TPH making the local tracks full. The would run local along with the local while the would run express in the center tracks at all times. Past Church Avenue the trains would run peak directional similar to the configuration which works. This is the plan that should be implemented.

 

 

No... south of Church people don't need EXP. Splitting the will cause unecessary crowding on the local, and empty trains on the express.

[Roadcruiser1]

DO YOU THINK WE (me and trainguy) WANT TO REBUILD 4TH AVENUE? (You brought out the caps, so no holds barred.) The would switch onto the express tracks after 4th. What is not clear about that???

 

And who is this "we" you speak of? You're the only one whose been dead set against it.

 

 

 

No... south of Church people don't need EXP. Splitting the will cause unnecessary crowding on the local, and empty trains on the express.

 

 

1) I am talking about the Culver Residents. I am not the only one arguing about it. Plus look at this.

 

There are no switches north of Fourth Avenue for any express service to come in here, and I don't see one getting built.

 

2) No it will not. Have you ever once ridden the Culver Line before? I am not trying to be mean I am just asking have you? If you haven't I suggest you do. The southern section of the Culver Line is just as heavily used as the northern part. Therefore they need express service as well.

 

Here is the track map for the southern section.

 

 

Now do you realize that I am actually correct? I am not trying to be mean. This is the truth.

[Threxx]

2. Um, take a CLOSER look at the switches before Smith-9th. Those switches can be used. You are not right, actually.

 

(You said it's been done before, so why is it now not possible?)

 

3. I have ridden Culver, multiple times. (I live on the line.) The fact is that south of 18 Avenue, the line is used about 2/3's as much.

 

Try to look at the track map before commenting on it.

[CenSin]

1) I am talking about the Culver Residents. I am not the only one arguing about it. Plus look at this.

 

There are no switches north of Fourth Avenue for any express service to come in here, and I don't see one getting built.

 

2) No it will not. Have you ever once ridden the Culver Line before? I am not trying to be mean I am just asking have you? If you haven't I suggest you do. The southern section of the Culver Line is just as heavily used as the northern part. Therefore they need express service as well.

 

Here is the track map for the southern section.

 

 

Now do you realize that I am actually correct? I am not trying to be mean. This is the truth.

 

The track maps are no longer accurate and have not been accurate since last year.

[Roadcruiser1]

2. Um, take a CLOSER look at the switches before Smith-9th. Those switches can be used. You are not right, actually.

 

(You said it's been done before, so why is it now not possible?)

 

3. I have ridden Culver, multiple times. (I live on the line.) The fact is that south of 18 Avenue, the line is used about 2/3's as much.

 

Try to look at the track map before commenting on it.

 

 

1) Those switches don't even directly lead to Fourth Avenue and switching would only delay trains moving to Manhattan and Coney Island. Plus the was local in the 70's and 80's and failed. The residents wanted Manhattan and they still do. With a running local it doesn't help. A majority of them doesn't want to transfer. I am speaking on what the majority of the Culver residents want from what I heard. A local won't help them.

 

2) Bergen Street (Express station)- 3,296,466 users.

18th Avenue (Express station)- 1,287,551 users.

 

This is from 2010 since I can't find the 2011 survey. Both stations have an increase of ridership in 2.3%.

 

The track maps are no longer accurate and have not been accurate since last year.

 

 

Sorry about the inaccuracies.

[Brighton Express]

4th Avenue can't be converted into an express station. How many times have we told you guys this? THE CULVER EXPRESS CONFIGURATION WAS BUILT BY THE IND SO THAT FOURTH AVENUE IS A LOCAL STATION. THEREFORE IT CAN'T BE CONVERTED INTO AN EXPRESS STATION. In basic architecture and engineering you are taught that once it's built the way it is it can't be modified unless if it was built for modifications. In this case it can't be modified therefore Fourth Avenue will remain a local station. You can't convert local into express and express into local.

 

And again I told you people are refusing to transfer. You guys want to do something? How about listening to the majority?

 

Also I am not against change. As long as it is possible. There is a limit from reality to fantasy. Fantasy are things that will never happen. The reality is thing that could happen because it is logical.

 

 

LOL I COULD NOT STOP LAUGHING.

 

Bro, you know that Smith Street, the terminal, is right after, allowing incoming trains to run local, and outgoing Express. HIT THE TRACK MAPS BRO.

 

Ahh touché, downtown trains will have to skip 4th Av.

[Grand Concourse]

Why this has gone to a page 4, I don't understand. But I will say that making all F's switch to the express past Smith-9th is not the answer. Who'd want to take a short 4-car train over what they currently have? I think a small split in F service makes the most sense. 1/3 express, 2/3 local. That way you spread the 'pain' over more stops as the whole point is to offer riders south of Church av a faster commute into Manhattan. If this pilot program is a success, then it would benefit riders south of Church.

 

Why that has gone on to this "run the F express past Smith 9th" into page 4 is just crazy.

[Roadcruiser1]

Why this has gone to a page 4, I don't understand. But I will say that making all F's switch to the express past Smith-9th is not the answer. Who'd want to take a short 4-car train over what they currently have? I think a small split in F service makes the most sense. 1/3 express, 2/3 local. That way you spread the 'pain' over more stops as the whole point is to offer riders south of Church av a faster commute into Manhattan. If this pilot program is a success, then it would benefit riders south of Church.

 

Why that has gone on to this "run the F express past Smith 9th" into page 4 is just crazy.

 

 

This was what I was exactly saying. It's the most logical idea. Instead it has now turned into the should run express and stop at Fourth Avenue only and not run down to Coney Island. A failure in the making.

[Roadcruiser1]

LOL I COULD NOT STOP LAUGHING.

 

Bro, you know that Smith Street, the terminal, is right after, allowing incoming trains to run local, and outgoing Express. HIT THE TRACK MAPS BRO.

 

Ahh touché, downtown trains will have to skip 4th Av.

 

 

1) I told you a million times that a local will not work. Will you stop that idea already?

 

2) And what is the point of having the run completely express and having to partially stop at Fourth Avenue. It will benefit nobody.

 

Again my idea which is similar to the majority of what most people want is the most workable. Stop dreaming of things that won't work, and be real.

[Brighton Express]

1) I told you a million times that a local will not work. Will you stop that idea already?

 

2) And what is the point of having the run completely express and having to partially stop at Fourth Avenue. It will benefit nobody.

 

Again my idea which is similar to the majority of what most people want is the most workable. Stop dreaming of things that won't work, and be real.

 

 

Well look who's talking;

 

I have been telling you that 4th Av will never become an Express stop.

I have, can't believe this, telling you that there will NEVER be a 2nd Av Subway Extension to Culver.

I have been telling you that the will not be coming to Culver.

 

 

And y'all thought my ideas were whack.

 

There will be barely any people on that train. Tell me how any other Express service would work. trains MUST stop at 4th Av, and I ain't dumb enough to think that the is going to wreck a piece of the viaduct to put in an Express station. NO ONE will ride on the Express past Church Av. It is the same reason they don't have Express on the Sea Beach, or the Astoria Express, and why the does not run Broadway/Bronx Express peak direction with the anymore.

 

The can put a switch in on the downtown side easy. They can do it at Cortelyou, they can do it anywhere.

 

How is alternating the Express trains going to help? Explain in full RoadCrusier1 and Grand Concourse. Explain it to the fullest you can.

 

Oh whats gonna happen next RoadCrusier1, put the alternating Express trains from Rockaway Blvd to Broad Channel, skipping Aqueduct and JFK Airport? Oh be sure to make some of them skip 200st when they are going back uptown.

[Grand Concourse]

You explain how you think forcing riders on the local stops b/w Smith-9th to Church av to take an inconsistent, 4-car G train that doesn't take them to Manhattan is a better plan. All that 'express F' of your plan will do is bring back the outcries of riders being against the express and being forced to take a G train that doesn't serve them. Then it's back to square 1 with all local only service.

 

Because of the M staying, there's not many options to do with what lines are running on the Culver line. To have an express, the local service would need to be sacrificed to accommodate those express runs. Alternate service would be so riders can at least try out the service and hopefully split the F b/w the riders of Park Slope and those south of Church av. And ftr, I do not see the need for express service south of Church. I believe those are only extra trains due to the higher demand on the Queens end of the line or to short turn trains at Kings Hgwy.

 

I don't understand why it must be an all or nothing deal with your idea. Would you want to be stuck with a short train with bad headways and doesn't take you to where you need to go? Some service is better than no service.