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  
Via Garibaldi 8

When will the (MTA) start adding more weekend service to other lines?

Recommended Posts

I know the (L) train has received more service, but there are plenty of subway lines on the weekends that are like sardine cans most of the day. This weekend I couldn't believe how packed the (1) train was both coming and going from my tutoring session up in Washington Heights. I think they're running (1) trains every 8 - 9 minutes, but they really should be running every 5 minutes or so. Same is true with the Lexington Avenue lines. I mean if they want to encourage folks to use the subways more (which they are doing) then why not add service where it is needed? My understanding was that even with the budget cuts that they would add service where it was needed.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, as you probably know, the MTA calculates service frequency based on their loading guidelines. After the service cuts, they began using 125% as the maximum loading (meaning that 100% of the seats would be filled up; 25% worth of standees). This is designed so that train cars shouldn't crush-loaded on the weekends; there are only supposed to be a fairly small number of standees.

 

So, considering that your trains were packed, that means that either the MTA's calculations were wrong, or that there was uneven loading on the trains (because of gaps and bunching). I think the latter is more likely, as train bunching is all too common in the subway system.

 

In other words, if every single (1) train is packed (which I doubt, but it could be true), then there really does need to be an increase of service. But if a crush-loaded train is followed by an empty one, then the problem is that the trains aren't running on schedule.

 

People should feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about what I said, if they know something that I don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, as you probably know, the MTA calculates service frequency based on their loading guidelines. After the service cuts, they began using 125% as the maximum loading (meaning that 100% of the seats would be filled up; 25% worth of standees). This is designed so that train cars shouldn't crush-loaded on the weekends; there are only supposed to be a fairly small number of standees.

 

So, considering that your trains were packed, that means that either the MTA's calculations were wrong, or that there was uneven loading on the trains (because of gaps and bunching). I think the latter is more likely, as train bunching is all too common in the subway system.

 

In other words, if every single (1) train is packed (which I doubt, but it could be true), then there really does need to be an increase of service. But if a crush-loaded train is followed by an empty one, then the problem is that the trains aren't running on schedule.

 

People should feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about what I said, if they know something that I don't.

 

 

Actually I've been using the (1) quite a bit over the last several weeks with my tutoring sessions and all and I have the schedule on my phone. They've been very prompt, so bunching isn't an issue. What seems to be going on is more folks are using the subways. With so many areas becoming gentrified I'm seeing a ton of young folks on the subways. Then you also have the tourists who are starting to use the subways more as well. On my way to my tutoring session today there were about 5 or 6 people taking the (1) train to go up to Riverdale to visit the area. I got on at 66th & Broadway and they were already on the train so folks are traveling longer on the subways too. One of them had been there before, but the others with her were clearly out of towners. I think in the past tourists were too afraid of the subways and were staying in the more touristy areas, but that is starting to change. They are traveling via the subway more and going to areas where you wouldn't expect to see tourists, which is a curse for folks like myself who go to advanced lengths to avoid them. <_< Then you also have the tourists that travel all together so you could easily got 15 - 20 of them swooping in on a car at once which would make the car packed to the point that folks couldn't get on.

 

Yesterday at 145th street about 20 people (young folks) piled on the train that were in a group coming from some event. Tourists for sure, and I was as shocked to see them get on up there as they were about riding the subway. They all got off at 72nd and Broadway.

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well then you really should be asking the MTA this, not the forum community :P. Nobody knows what's going through their heads; whether or not they know that ridership is going up. Of course, you'll probably tell me that the MTA doesn't care (and that they wouldn't respond if you asked them). I don't know what to tell you, in that case...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well then you really should be asking the MTA this, not the forum community :P. Nobody knows what's going through their heads; whether or not they know that ridership is going up. Of course, you'll probably tell me that the MTA doesn't care (and that they wouldn't respond if you asked them). I don't know what to tell you, in that case...

 

 

No it's an appropriate question because sometimes you have personnel on the forums that may have inside information. One of the main reasons the (L) train got more service was because of community leaders pushing for it. The (1) has always had good service and quite frankly I would say that even every 8 - 9 minutes isn't at all terrible. My waits aren't long, but the trains are packed, so at some point they'll be forced to do something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh. You are not alone Via. The (1) is fine as is; I would say what you experienced was an anomaly or happened due to train bunching or something trivial unless you rode in the middle of the train. Actually I thought it was 7-8 minutes. Maybe they cut it a bit recently, but there is always room on that train if you go towards the back or even the front. Ride in car #6 (conductor's), you do not get a seat until like 181 or maybe 207. Ride in car #8, seats start appearing much sooner. The (4) and (6) each run every 8 minutes and the (5) runs every 12. 8 minutes is a pretty good weekend headway; the (7) runs every 6 minutes for a good reason as you probably know. The (2) used to run every 10 minutes and now it is 12; I really think it should be 8 since it is the only line connecting damn near the entire Bronx to Upper Harlem and the West Side, but what can you do. I would generally chalk these things up to the economy to be honest with you. And loading guidelines of course. And some politics.

 

I do not think any train should run every 12 minutes on the weekend unless it is something like the (5) which is only by itself for five stops north of Unionport. South of there people can take the (5) or the (2) to the (4). The (3) running every 12 minutes by itself, causing there to be service every 12 minutes east of Utica, would not be as much of a problem if it ended at Utica while the (4) went to New Lots. They might not give Livonia service every 8 minutes on the weekends, but whatever. The (2)(3)(5) are the only lines that run every 12 minutes most of the day on weekends at the moment. It seems like if the (C), which is the only weekend service at IND CPW and IND Fulton St local stops, runs every 10 minutes on the weekends then the (2), which is the only service at roughly the same number of stops along WPR and Nostrand Ave as well as the only West Side service between Unionport and 149-GC should run at that same headway or better, but oh well. It seems to me like you could chalk that one up to politics quite a bit, especially when comparing the CPW neighborhoods to the WPR, Southern Blvd, Westchester Ave, E 149 St, and Nostrand Ave neighborhoods. Talk about the one that got away. :-/

 

Oh, and not to mention the fact that a lot of people that use the Nostrand Ave line at the terminal come all the way from Canarsie, Flatlands, and the Rockaways. With CPW you have the West Side IRT right nearby and with Fulton St in Brooklyn you have partial parallels in the BMT Jamaica line and the IND Crosstown line. In the Bronx the two West Side lines other than the (1) ( (2) and (D)) are very far apart, and Nostrand's closest parallel is the Brighton.

 

The more I think about that one the more political I think it is that the (C) runs more than the (2) on weekends. As Mysterious2train would say, meh.

Edited by BrooklynIRT
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No it's an appropriate question because sometimes you have personnel on the forums that may have inside information. One of the main reasons the (L) train got more service was because of community leaders pushing for it. The (1) has always had good service and quite frankly I would say that even every 8 - 9 minutes isn't at all terrible. My waits aren't long, but the trains are packed, so at some point they'll be forced to do something.

 

 

Sorry Mr. subway station but this is a legit and good question/topic by VG8. I also use sometimes the (1) to transfer at Marble Hill (mainly weekends)to save a few dollars using on metro north service all the way to grand central(mainly if going to the west side/Penn Station or PABT). Man, sometimes Bronx Bound it's SRO almost to the end i.e Dyckman and SF-Bound it's usually SRO by 145th St. However Brooklyn IRT explained it well about train bunching problems causing crowding. If anything the (2) and (C) need increased weekend headways since last night. Does not mean the (1) should not get extra trains at least between 3-9pm on weekends though.

 

And VG8 to answer his question further. During the doomsday 2010 cuts, I remember the TA stating the feason for the 8-11 minute weekend headways since they were also doing long term work on the (1) mainly between 242 and 168th. Many weekends saw the shutdown of service over the last 2-3 years as well due to many of the stations getting upgrades such as Dyckman, 225th and 238. I heard the Broadway line work is about 1 year from being close to finish in 2013. Just adding my takes.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No it's an appropriate question because sometimes you have personnel on the forums that may have inside information.

 

You're absolutely right. I wasn't thinking about that (my fault).

 

 

Sorry Mr. subway station but this is a legit and good question/topic by VG8.

 

You're right, too. BTW, I wasn't trying to suggest that the thread should have been locked; I was just trying to express that there was no point in someone like me trying to explain the MTA's decision to not add service. Sorry guys, I was wrong to question VG8's idea. Edited by TheSubwayStation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh. You are not alone Via. The (1) is fine as is; I would say what you experienced was an anomaly or happened due to train bunching or something trivial unless you rode in the middle of the train. Actually I thought it was 7-8 minutes. Maybe they cut it a bit recently, but there is always room on that train if you go towards the back or even the front. Ride in car #6 (conductor's), you do not get a seat until like 181 or maybe 207. Ride in car #8, seats start appearing much sooner. The (4) and (6) each run every 8 minutes and the (5) runs every 12. 8 minutes is a pretty good weekend headway; the (7) runs every 6 minutes for a good reason as you probably know. The (2) used to run every 10 minutes and now it is 12; I really think it should be 8 since it is the only line connecting damn near the entire Bronx to Upper Harlem and the West Side, but what can you do. I would generally chalk these things up to the economy to be honest with you. And loading guidelines of course. And some politics.

 

I do not think any train should run every 12 minutes on the weekend unless it is something like the (5) which is only by itself for five stops north of Unionport. South of there people can take the (5) or the (2) to the (4). The (3) running every 12 minutes by itself, causing there to be service every 12 minutes east of Utica, would not be as much of a problem if it ended at Utica while the (4) went to New Lots. They might not give Livonia service every 8 minutes on the weekends, but whatever. The (2)(3)(5) are the only lines that run every 12 minutes most of the day on weekends at the moment. It seems like if the (C), which is the only weekend service at IND CPW and IND Fulton St local stops, runs every 10 minutes on the weekends then the (2), which is the only service at roughly the same number of stops along WPR and Nostrand Ave as well as the only West Side service between Unionport and 149-GC should run at that same headway or better, but oh well. It seems to me like you could chalk that one up to politics quite a bit, especially when comparing the CPW neighborhoods to the WPR, Southern Blvd, Westchester Ave, E 149 St, and Nostrand Ave neighborhoods. The one that got away. :-/

 

The more I think about that one the more political I think it is that the (C) runs more than the (2) on weekends. As Mysterious2train would say, meh.

 

 

Yesterday I used the (1) train about 5 times and used different cars... First car, 4th car and so on purposely trying to avoid the crowds and like I said, I've been riding that line pretty regularly. Those trains are becoming more packed further than in the past. The crowd doesn't really clear out during certain parts of the weekend until maybe 137th street and even then you still may have some folks standing all the way until 191st street where I get off at. As for the (2)... That train is ridiculous... At 96th street you should see the folks packed on the train. I don't even bother waiting anymore.

 

I would also say that (7) could use increased service. I'm not sure what could really be done though as the service is not bad at all. It's similar to the Lexington Avenue... Good service but too many crowds... Perhaps the (MTA) realizes this which is why they've created the weekend deal on the LIRR.

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I think about that one the more political I think it is that the (C) runs more than the (2) on weekends. As Mysterious2train would say, meh.

 

Really? Does the (C) go to neighborhoods with more political power? And besides, the (2) is MUCH more frequent on weekdays (I think), and shares most of its line with the (3). Although in the Bronx and further out in Brooklyn, I understand that the (2) is their only option.

 

One thing that I think should be made clear is that the (L) was sort of a unique situation, because the service increases were linked to signal improvements. I don't think the (L) is a suggestion that the MTA intends on increasing service on other lines.

Edited by TheSubwayStation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? Does the (C) go to neighborhoods with more political power? And besides, the (2) is MUCH more frequent on weekdays (I think), and shares most of its line with the (3).

 

Although in the Bronx and further out in Brooklyn, I understand that the (2) is their only option.

 

 

Actually I've always found both the (2) and the (3) to run poorly. They usually come right behind each other and then you wait for however long it is until the next two come bunched together, which is usually a good 10 - 15 minutes, or at least it feels that long. I think the (C) runs pretty decently when you compare it to how crappy the (A) runs. Also something else that is weird, how is it that you can have two (2) trains running back to back when they're spaced to run so far apart in terms of frequencies?? I could've sworn I saw two of them back to back today while on the (1) train between 96th & 86th street.

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how crowded the (C) is on the weekends.

 

The reason why the (2) bunches up is because of flagging on much of the WPR line in the Bronx, according to Two-Timer. Due to this and perhaps due to the fact that they do not make it a point to hold the (2) outside 142 St junction southbound to let the (3) go first, the (2) ends up carrying all the people from the Bronx as well as those who do not want to wait for the (3) (or (2) if they are neck-and-neck) even though the clock says it will be there soon, and/or headlights are in the tunnel behind the (2) that is sitting in the station, and/or the conductor is saying that there is another train coming up.

 

Really? Does the (C) go to neighborhoods with more political power? And besides, the (2) is MUCH more frequent on weekdays (I think), and shares most of its line with the (3).

 

Although in the Bronx and further out in Brooklyn, I understand that the (2) is their only option.

 

 

Yes, weekdays it is much more frequent. But remember the riders on CPW have both the (B) and (C) weekdays.

 

Does the (C) go through certain hoods with more political power than certain hoods along the (2), hell to the yes. There is not even a contest between CPW (C) and WPR/Southern Blvd/Westchester Ave/E 149 St/Nostrand Ave (2). Among those corridors you have some political power along the (2) in Pelham Pkwy, but that is just one hood. On Nostrand you have some, it depends on the stop/hood. I think most of it would come from around and south of the Junction. Also President and Sterling perhaps since those areas are gentrifying. B35 via Church might be able to elaborate on this.

 

 

Actually I've always found both the (2) and the (3) to run poorly. They usually come right behind each other and then you wait for however long it is until the next two come bunched together, which is usually a good 10 - 15 minutes, or at least it feels that long.

 

Sometimes. Weekends it will happen due to flagging/construction and whatnot, weekdays it will happen due to crowding and excessive dwell times at stations, also I feel that the could-be-better crowd distribution due to the (3) ending at New Lots instead of Utica is a factor along with inadequate service levels that come with that.

 

Also something else that is weird, how is it that you can have two (2) trains running back to back when they're spaced to run so far apart in terms of frequencies?? I could've sworn I saw two of them back to back today while on the (1) train between 96th & 86th street.

 

See my first lines (flagging).

Edited by BrooklynIRT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the (C) go through certain hoods with more political power than certain hoods along the (2), hell to the yes. There is not even a contest between CPW (C) and WPR/Southern Blvd/Westchester Ave/E 149 St/Nostrand Ave (2). Among those corridors you have some political power along the (2) in Pelham Pkwy, but that is just one hood. On Nostrand you have some, it depends on the stop/hood. I think most of it would come from around and south of the Junction. Also President and Sterling perhaps since those areas are gentrifying. B35 via Church might be able to elaborate on this.

 

Then why was the (2) the first to get NTTs? And why is the (C) stuck with the oldest trains? Remember how everyone says the (A) and (C) lines are the "trash dump" of the system?

 

Also, I think that the 7 Av line (serving the Financial District) carries possibly more political power than the 8 Av line.

Edited by TheSubwayStation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would also say that (7) could use increased service. I'm not sure what could really be done though as the service is not bad at all. It's similar to the Lexington Avenue... Good service but too many crowds... Perhaps the (MTA) realizes this which is why they've created the weekend deal on the LIRR.

 

Well, once they finish implementing CBTC on that line and take delivery of the final R188 cars, those problems should be at least partially mitigated. It would be nice to see express service implemented on the weekends after this capacity expansion project for the (7) is complete.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, once they finish implementing CBTC on that line and take delivery of the final R188 cars, those problems should be at least partially mitigated. It would be nice to see express service implemented on the weekends after this capacity expansion project for the (7) is complete.

 

 

I would agree with that. Express service should be added on the weekends because so many people take the (7) to Flushing and it is quite a schlepp on the local. In fact it would be great to have express <7> service in both directions for the weekdays and weekends.

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would agree with that. Express service should be added on the weekends because so many people take the (7) to Flushing and it is quite a schlepp on the local. In fact it would be great to have express <7> service in both directions for the weekdays and weekends.

 

 

It sucks the way the line was only built with 1 express track. It's got to suck to ride it all the way out to Flushing and then transfer to a bus on top of that.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 1 is really overcrowded northbound between 42nd and 72nd, that portion reminds me of 14 - 42 N/B on the Lex.

 

I have no issue with the headways on the (1), but the A/C on those trains tend to suck though, perhaps they should swap the (4) & (1) fleets during the summer so the (1) line 62A's can run on a line that's more pleasant on their A/C systems (Long express run and long run outside in the BX). 142/As A/C is nice and frosty, ironically the 62s on the (3) and the 62As on the TS Shuttle have pretty good A/C where's the ones on the 1 line do not.

 

The (2) was the first line to get NTT because cars that was running on it prior to the 142s was flabby & sick, where's the 32 - 42 fleets still had some life left in them.

 

I think the (1) headways is fine, yea its crowded but its not like those trains are so stuffed that people are being left behind on the platform due to lack of space.

 

Just my observation though, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would agree with that. Express service should be added on the weekends because so many people take the (7) to Flushing and it is quite a schlepp on the local. In fact it would be great to have express <7> service in both directions for the weekdays and weekends.

 

 

The <7> used to run middays, but in 2009 it was reverted to rush-hour only with the rationale of GOs being too disruptive. Weekend service would probably be similar, a lot of GOs have the (7) using the express track in one direction.

Edited by Mysterious2train
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The <7> used to run middays, but in 2009 it was reverted to rush-hour only with the rationale of GOs being too disruptive. Weekend service would probably be similar, a lot of GOs have the (7) using the express track in one direction.

 

 

The (7) Midday express should return. The ridership was there but just another victim of the budget cuts.

 

FYI. VG8 there already weekend (7) service for Mets games during the season.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The (7) Midday express should return. The ridership was there but just another victim of the budget cuts.

 

FYI. VG8 there already weekend (7) service for Mets games during the season.

 

 

I don't think it would've saved much money anyway. It costs more to run a train local than it does to run it express because of longer runtimes. I think it had more to do with GOs. (Remember: Frequency costs, speed saves)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Then why was the (2) the first to get NTTs? And why is the (C) stuck with the oldest trains? Remember how everyone says the (A) and (C) lines are the "trash dump" of the system?

 

Also, I think that the 7 Av line (serving the Financial District) carries possibly more political power than the 8 Av line.

 

The (2) needed the NTTs since the (2) and (5) often swap equipment and have more variations in service than the (C). Obviously it is easier to swap routes with trains that have electronic signage rather than scroll signage. (C) has less ridership than (2), but is still the only weekend service at the CPW local stops, and as a result the local residents and politicians can use their political power to make sure that the (C) trains are no more than 10 minutes apart (on average).

 

People who use the (2)(3) anywhere between 135 St and Franklin Ave or Nostrand Ave (3) or President St (2)(Nostrand/EP and President/Nostrand are just two little blocks apart, so those who boarded anywhere west of Nostrand can use either train and either stop if they want to go to the Nostrand/EP/President area) probably did not care or even notice that the weekend (2) was cut from 10 minutes (6 TPH) to 12 (5 TPH) because the weekend (2)(3) together still make service every 6 minutes on average, which is good enough for them.

 

Those people might as well be calling them the (23) train. :) They be like, what is this (2)? What is this (3)? These trains have no distinct identities to me just because they serve different parts of the Bronx/Harlem/eastern Brooklyn! What is this "New Lots Ave?" What is this "Utica Ave?" What is this "Junction?" All I care about is my Manhattan/Downtown Brooklyn/Park Slope/Prospect Heights-centricity. And so on and so forth.

 

Not that I have anything against those folks; I was just spoiling for an opportunity to poke some fun at the Manhattan/Downtown Brooklyn/Park Slope/Prospect Heights-centricity of a lot of transplants as well as that of the city in general. Bloomie (and likely most other NYC mayors as well) is so stubbornly Manhattan-centric I could puke. They should have done some little things such as making some small modifications to improve the Brooklyn IRT as I described in another thread before getting into all the ginormous Manhattan projects (SAS, FSTC, ESA, Javits, etc), and perhaps even a Utica Ave subway and/or something to help out the (4) in the Bronx while they were at it. But noooo, they had to be all about Manhattan...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It sucks the way the line was only built with 1 express track. It's got to suck to ride it all the way out to Flushing and then transfer to a bus on top of that.

 

 

I've done it and it sucks royally going from Grand Central to Flushing local then having to switch and wait for a local bus... I would've taken the express bus but my colleague hates riding express buses so I schlepped on the subway. <_<

 

The 1 is really overcrowded northbound between 42nd and 72nd, that portion reminds me of 14 - 42 N/B on the Lex.

 

I have no issue with the headways on the (1), but the A/C on those trains tend to suck though, perhaps they should swap the (4) & (1) fleets during the summer so the (1) line 62A's can run on a line that's more pleasant on their A/C systems (Long express run and long run outside in the BX). 142/As A/C is nice and frosty, ironically the 62s on the (3) and the 62As on the TS Shuttle have pretty good A/C where's the ones on the 1 line do not.

 

The (2) was the first line to get NTT because cars that was running on it prior to the 142s was flabby & sick, where's the 32 - 42 fleets still had some life left in them.

 

I think the (1) headways is fine, yea its crowded but its not like those trains are so stuffed that people are being left behind on the platform due to lack of space.

 

Just my observation though, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Yes, the A/C on the (1) SUCKS royally. If they're not going to provide more service, at least pump up the A/C. It seems like the A/C used to be better on those trains, but maybe it's because they're getting older. Quite frankly, I wouldn't mind seeing those trains go bye bye... I hate holding on to those greasy hand rails too.... Makes me feel dirty.

 

As for the (1) not being too crowded, it is reaching the point to where they are becoming quite close to leaving folks behind especially on Saturdays... Starting to look like the Lexington Avenue line during the week, albeit during the weekend...

 

The <7> used to run middays, but in 2009 it was reverted to rush-hour only with the rationale of GOs being too disruptive. Weekend service would probably be similar, a lot of GOs have the (7) using the express track in one direction.

 

Well what about when the R188s and all of that comes in?

 

The (7) Midday express should return. The ridership was there but just another victim of the budget cuts.

 

Tell me about it... Those (7) trains are a mess in the midday in both directions. Doesn't help that the people that ride are beyond rude. Pushing and shoving and such... <_<

 

FYI. VG8 there already weekend (7) service for Mets games during the season.

 

 

Weekend (7) service for Mets games has nothing to do with weekend (7) service in general... The line could use any additional express service it could get.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People who use the (2)(3) anywhere between 135 St and Franklin Ave or Nostrand Ave (3) or President St (2)(Nostrand/EP and President/Nostrand are just two little blocks apart, so those who boarded anywhere west of Nostrand can use either train and either stop if they want to go to the Nostrand/EP/President area) probably did not care or even notice that the weekend (2) was cut from 10 minutes (6 TPH) to 12 (5 TPH) because the weekend (2)(3) together still make service every 6 minutes on average, which is good enough for them.

 

 

The thing is that if they come bunched up together, you could end up waiting close to 10 minutes anywa, instead of maybe 8 minutes before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is that if they come bunched up together, you could end up waiting close to 10 minutes anywa, instead of maybe 8 minutes before.

 

 

Which is usually the case... The (2) usually comes and then a (3) comes right after that. In fact I rarely see the (3). Usually the (2)...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how crowded the (C) is on the weekends.

 

The reason why the (2) bunches up is because of flagging on much of the WPR line in the Bronx, according to Two-Timer. Due to this and perhaps due to the fact that they do not make it a point to hold the (2) outside 142 St junction southbound to let the (3) go first, the (2) ends up carrying all the people from the Bronx as well as those who do not want to wait for the (3) (or (2) if they are neck-and-neck) even though the clock says it will be there soon, and/or headlights are in the tunnel behind the (2) that is sitting in the station, and/or the conductor is saying that there is another train coming up.

 

 

 

Yes, weekdays it is much more frequent. But remember the riders on CPW have both the (B) and (C) weekdays.

 

Does the (C) go through certain hoods with more political power than certain hoods along the (2), hell to the yes. There is not even a contest between CPW (C) and WPR/Southern Blvd/Westchester Ave/E 149 St/Nostrand Ave (2). Among those corridors you have some political power along the (2) in Pelham Pkwy, but that is just one hood. On Nostrand you have some, it depends on the stop/hood. I think most of it would come from around and south of the Junction. Also President and Sterling perhaps since those areas are gentrifying. B35 via Church might be able to elaborate on this.

 

 

When it comes to political power on the state level (since MTA is a state agency), it sometimes depends on the senators themselves as well as the priorities of the neighborhoods in which these subway lines pass through.

 

In the case of neighborhood priorities, along the lower WPR line in the South Bronx, transportation often takes a back seat to issues such as crime and education, which have been more longstanding in the South Bronx since the 1960s.

 

As for the senators themselves, I will also stay in the South Bronx on this one as Senator Ruben Diaz Sr., who serves very public transporation-dependent neighborhoods such as Morrisania, Melrose, Parkchester, West Farms, Hunts Point, and Soundview, voted in favor of the recent fare hike.

  • Upvote 1

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.