T to Dyre Avenue Posted September 10, 2014 Share #1401 Posted September 10, 2014 (edited) I have never heard of the MTA officially using a theoretical 'P' train in their enviormental studies or their board committee meeting materials before. Its a myth that was based off a rollsign on the side of an R32. The MTA always have designated the main service of the SAS (since 1968) as the . Teal as the color indicator starting in 2007. I haven't either. Only use for P I've ever heard of was when the MTA considered running a non-stop Jamaica Center-Penn Station service via the , and lines during threatened Amtrak strikes in the 90s that would have forced the LIRR out of Penn Station (Amtrak dispatches all service into and out of Penn and owns the tracks and tunnels). That service could only have run with R32s and/or R38s because those were the only cars that had T on their rollsigns (black T in a white circle in the middle with no route info) Eric B's website says that Y might have been the letter originally proposed for the main SAS service. I can see that because in 1968, there was still a T service via the West End Line...well, TT actually. It was the West End shuttle service that ran nights and all day Sunday when the B didn't run. It was eliminated in 1970, leaving open for future use. Edited September 10, 2014 by T to Dyre Avenue 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallyhorse Posted September 10, 2014 Share #1402 Posted September 10, 2014 Wally you cant have that and the M to queens blvd at different times. Theoretically if one wanted 6av services there would have to be a V reinstated to replace the M along queens blvd but then agian a shuttle whether V or P would still be easier the altering the patterns of an M just for certain time periods The idea is that the split (to Queens Boulevard weekdays 5:30 AM-8:00 PM and supplementing the on the SAS at all other times) is that you can't have trains crossing over from 6th Avenue to the SAS at 63rd/Lex during the day as it would disrupt the too much while evenings and weekends it would be a very useful supplement since the upper east side is very densely populated and can use having a second line when both are running at reduced levels so SAS riders can use either to get to midtown in the evenings. As one who grew up on the UES, this is something that I would do knowing how that area is much more 24/7 than ever. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T to Dyre Avenue Posted September 10, 2014 Share #1403 Posted September 10, 2014 The idea is that the split (to Queens Boulevard weekdays 5:30 AM-8:00 PM and supplementing the on the SAS at all other times) is that you can't have trains crossing over from 6th Avenue to the SAS at 63rd/Lex during the day as it would disrupt the too much while evenings and weekends it would be a very useful supplement since the upper east side is very densely populated and can use having a second line when both are running at reduced levels so SAS riders can use either to get to midtown in the evenings. As one who grew up on the UES, this is something that I would do knowing how that area is much more 24/7 than ever. A split would be too confusing. It's no better than the proposed "split (Q)" service a few posters are floating around here for running the to both Astoria and 2nd Ave (which damn near certainly won't happen, and for very good reasons). Having to show this on maps and in stations will confuse people greatly. Also, why can't you have trains crossing over from 6th Ave to 2nd Ave at Lex/63rd during the day? How would this train disrupt the too much? Does the southbound disrupt the too much when it crosses from the local track to the express track after Queens Plaza? Should we just get rid of the on Queens Blvd, so it doesn't disrupt the or trains at Queens Plaza? Of course not! And I fail to see your logic in the UES being more of a 24/7 area than ever as being a reason for SAS riders to have the and an off-hours train to get to Midtown in the evenings. It is a densely populated area for sure - with a lot of people headed to Midtown during the day for work. Shouldn't that be when the extra service runs? How many people coming from Midtown are headed to the UES for a night out? With options for nightlife much closer to them - or in other parts of Manhattan further south (like the East Village), it's probably a lot less than UES residents commuting to Midtown during the day. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallyhorse Posted September 10, 2014 Share #1404 Posted September 10, 2014 You have to have grown up on the UES to understand: Sure, people go around the area as well, but there just as many who both come up to the area from other parts for the bars and the like and likewise go to midtown to get away from those who come uptown as they want to be out and about, just not there. It's one thing about that area that I know from having both grown up there and then being back there as often as I was in the 1990's and 2000's. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamen Rider Posted September 10, 2014 Share #1405 Posted September 10, 2014 (edited) Correct me if I'm wrong, but did you not once say you LEFT the UES 20 years ago. Neighborhoods change all the time. Anyone who left Ridgewood the same time you left Manhattan, would find the north section inundated with Polish immigrants, and the south section being invaded by hipsters. And forget Bushwick and Williamsburg. I would dare say you really don't know the USE any more. Edited September 10, 2014 by Kamen Rider 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted September 10, 2014 Share #1406 Posted September 10, 2014 Also, why can't you have trains crossing over from 6th Ave to 2nd Ave at Lex/63rd during the day? How would this train disrupt the too much? Does the southbound disrupt the too much when it crosses from the local track to the express track after Queens Plaza? Should we just get rid of the on Queens Blvd, so it doesn't disrupt the or trains at Queens Plaza? Of course not! Well, we don't know the specific layout of these switches. There are many switches that do fine in regular service, but there are also those which don't operate well even under reduced loads (see: that West 4 switch everyone with a Culver Express fantasy likes to talk about). For all we know it's like Parsons/Archer, where the switches are in fine condition but are suboptimally placed for regular use. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTA Dude Posted September 10, 2014 Share #1407 Posted September 10, 2014 A split would be too confusing. It's no better than the proposed "split (Q)" service a few posters are floating around here for running the to both Astoria and 2nd Ave (which damn near certainly won't happen, and for very good reasons). Having to show this on maps and in stations will confuse people greatly. Also, why can't you have trains crossing over from 6th Ave to 2nd Ave at Lex/63rd during the day? How would this train disrupt the too much? Does the southbound disrupt the too much when it crosses from the local track to the express track after Queens Plaza? Should we just get rid of the on Queens Blvd, so it doesn't disrupt the or trains at Queens Plaza? Of course not! And I fail to see your logic in the UES being more of a 24/7 area than ever as being a reason for SAS riders to have the and an off-hours train to get to Midtown in the evenings. It is a densely populated area for sure - with a lot of people headed to Midtown during the day for work. Shouldn't that be when the extra service runs? How many people coming from Midtown are headed to the UES for a night out? With options for nightlife much closer to them - or in other parts of Manhattan further south (like the East Village), it's probably a lot less than UES residents commuting to Midtown during the day. Agree but what about split ? Not supporting him but just wondering. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted September 10, 2014 Share #1408 Posted September 10, 2014 Well, we don't know the specific layout of these switches. There are many switches that do fine in regular service, but there are also those which don't operate well even under reduced loads (see: that West 4 switch everyone with a Culver Express fantasy likes to talk about). For all we know it's like Parsons/Archer, where the switches are in fine condition but are suboptimally placed for regular use. Regarding the West 4th switches, that's mainly because the interlocking at that station dates back to the original IND. If I recall correctly, it takes some time to move those switches back and forth. Agree but what about split ? Not supporting him but just wondering. It's primarily because both branches of the A are relatively lightly used, so you could get away with splitting the service. However, with the recurring discussion of sending all of the A trains to the Rockaways in lieu of an extended C to Lefferts, that belief may be changing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quill Depot Posted September 10, 2014 Share #1409 Posted September 10, 2014 Am I the only one who thinks SAS south of 63rd is bust? Maybe an spur to the East Village might provide better service to the Lower East Side, a dense area with hardly any service as it stands. The Lex plus the other lines entering Manhattan seem like enough. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted September 10, 2014 Share #1410 Posted September 10, 2014 Do me a favor and take a ride on the Lex during the rush hour. Then tell me how a full length Second Avenue isn't necessary. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTA Dude Posted September 10, 2014 Share #1411 Posted September 10, 2014 Am I the only one who thinks SAS south of 63rd is bust? Maybe an spur to the East Village might provide better service to the Lower East Side, a dense area with hardly any service as it stands. The Lex plus the other lines entering Manhattan seem like enough. Bust? Maybe. SAS south of that could work but then we don't know where it should go. Maybe if north of 63rd, SAS service is less needed for the amount of TPH scheduled, then some trains could terminate at a rebuilt 21st Street. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CenSin Posted September 10, 2014 Author Share #1412 Posted September 10, 2014 (edited) Well, we don't know the specific layout of these switches. There are many switches that do fine in regular service, but there are also those which don't operate well even under reduced loads (see: that West 4 switch everyone with a Culver Express fantasy likes to talk about). For all we know it's like Parsons/Archer, where the switches are in fine condition but are suboptimally placed for regular use.The switch layout is not the problem, because as we can observe from the 6 Avenue express trains, the / always takes longer to get from Broadway–Lafayette Street to West 4 Street–Washington Square. In fact, the junction appears to be designed in such a way that it's route-neutral. The time needed to adjust the switches is the problem. Edited September 10, 2014 by CenSin 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quill Depot Posted September 10, 2014 Share #1413 Posted September 10, 2014 Do me a favor and take a ride on the Lex during the rush hour. Then tell me how a full length Second Avenue isn't necessary. Sure the trains might be a little crowded south of 42nd, but still it's a bust. Lex has lots of alternatives already down there, no need for yet another one. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTA Dude Posted September 10, 2014 Share #1414 Posted September 10, 2014 Sure the trains might be a little crowded south of 42nd, but still it's a bust. Lex has lots of alternatives already down there, no need for yet another one. You mean Union Square. The only line for backup for Lex is B'way. And it is still pretty far north of Union. Also, Broadway only runs at 4-8 minute intervals. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quill Depot Posted September 10, 2014 Share #1415 Posted September 10, 2014 You mean Union Square. The only line for backup for Lex is B'way. And it is still pretty far north of Union. Also, Broadway only runs at 4-8 minute intervals. No 6th Ave isn't too far away, and connections to it aren't hard. Except for 33rd there are other connections to B'way. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTA Dude Posted September 10, 2014 Share #1416 Posted September 10, 2014 No 6th Ave isn't too far away, and connections to it aren't hard. Except for 33rd there are other connections to B'way. It isn't too far? It is far. 3 Avenues. B'way, one. Until 14th. But seriously, besides Union and down, Lex is pretty much independent with no helpers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quill Depot Posted September 11, 2014 Share #1417 Posted September 11, 2014 It isn't too far? It is far. 3 Avenues. B'way, one. Until 14th. But seriously, besides Union and down, Lex is pretty much independent with no helpers. 23rd is only one avenue. Just saying there's no real use of another overlapping line. 28th is fairly close as well, 1-2 blocks I'm pretty sure. 33rd is the only exception really. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTA Dude Posted September 11, 2014 Share #1418 Posted September 11, 2014 23rd is only one avenue. Just saying there's no real use of another overlapping line. 28th is fairly close as well, 1-2 blocks I'm pretty sure. 33rd is the only exception really. Lex riders going to 2nd avenue would not use Broadway. They'd rather have the Lex which is closer. These people these days, just don't like to walk. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quill Depot Posted September 11, 2014 Share #1419 Posted September 11, 2014 Lex riders going to 2nd avenue would not use Broadway. They'd rather have the Lex which is closer. These people these days, just don't like to walk. Ok then they can go ahead, I'm just saying that the line itself and west of the line is already covered by another line, and their is no real need for another. If I were the MTA I'd focus on underserved areas, where there is no service whatsoever. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTA Dude Posted September 11, 2014 Share #1420 Posted September 11, 2014 Ok then they can go ahead, I'm just saying that the line itself and west of the line is already covered by another line, and their is no real need for another. If I were the MTA I'd focus on underserved areas, where there is no service whatsoever. Yeah, they will build the SAS up to Phase 2, extend the to the west, then keep on moving down. Also, the thing with Broadway and Lex is that they cover almost the exact same area due to the fact that they are like a small block away from each other. So Lex and B'way are nearly the same from Union to Canal. It is still Lex covering that area because people make such a big deal of a single block, so unless people can brighten up, SAS phase 3 will be needed. I also doubt that the can handle it up there, so once phase 3 is done and the can come, they ain't putting their main focus anywhere else and getting their heads outta Lex. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quill Depot Posted September 11, 2014 Share #1421 Posted September 11, 2014 The "lazy" ones are the ones who already take a 15min bus ride to get to the stop, I can't blame them. My proposal for the LES, is to add an extension from the under the 14th St and down Ave B to Delancey-Essex 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted September 11, 2014 Share #1422 Posted September 11, 2014 (edited) The Lexington Avenue Line is incredibly busy on rush hours straight through to even 59th street on the N/B on the AM rush and the reverse PM rush hours, trust me crushloaded cars all the way back from Brooklyn on the 4 and 5, thats what you have to keep in mind. You will have to jump on the 4 and 5 on the AM rush at Atlantic Avenue and you will see what I mean.Also as you may recall the MTA has the intentions of building the SAS from Hanover Square/Seaport all the way to the tip of lower Manhattan. Why? For Brooklyn expansion as they anticipate the overcrowded conditions on the Lexington Avenue Line to continue from end to end. Lets not forget Bowling Green either which is commuter madness even on weekends all reasons as to why Phase 3 and 4 are absolutely necessary. The whole point of the SAS? I'll let you answer that question, while I stop here. Edited September 11, 2014 by realizm 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RollOver Posted September 11, 2014 Share #1423 Posted September 11, 2014 The and are always more crowded/delayed than the and . The Lex needs a relief once the entire SAS corridor is completed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted September 11, 2014 Share #1424 Posted September 11, 2014 The and are always more crowded/delayed than the and . The Lex needs a relief once the entire SAS corridor is completed. Obviously! Thats what we were trying to explain for two pages now, lol. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RollOver Posted September 11, 2014 Share #1425 Posted September 11, 2014 At least they run more frequently than the and out of Brooklyn in the morning rush and reverse in the evening rush. The out of the Bronx in the morning rush and reverse in the evening rush seems to have the same 12 tph like the and do too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.