Grand Concourse Posted July 23, 2012 Share #76 Posted July 23, 2012 You can't terminate the at 34th, you'll hold up the . But if you mean for the to switch over at 34th or B'way-Lafayette and terminate at 2nd av, then that's fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T to Dyre Avenue Posted July 23, 2012 Share #77 Posted July 23, 2012 To me, that sounds like just about the best way to improve weekend CPW local service. By running the from 145th or maybe 168th St, you have a service that connects many of the city's popular attractions (Central Park, Museum of Natural History, Rockefeller Center) together on one line. And you would be boosting service to another area that's very popular on weekends by having the weekend serve 2nd Ave. I think it could be a well-used service. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q10 Airport Posted July 24, 2012 Share #78 Posted July 24, 2012 You can't terminate the at 34th, you'll hold up the . But if you mean for the to switch over at 34th or B'way-Lafayette and terminate at 2nd av, then that's fine. I thought the used to run to 34th. I guess they discovered the problem with the while the terminated at 34th, hmm? Regardless, extra service would certainly be on the table for improving CPW service. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lance Posted July 24, 2012 Share #79 Posted July 24, 2012 When the B (and D) terminated at 34 St-Herald Sq southbound, there wasn't any express service south of Herald Sq as the Manhattan Bridge north tracks were closed due to rehabilitation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted July 25, 2012 Share #80 Posted July 25, 2012 They could run the to Prospect Park, and relay, like the (J)/(4) shuttle used to. That would also give the Brighton riders the easier transfer to 6th Ave. instead of the long transfer walk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quill Depot Posted July 25, 2012 Share #81 Posted July 25, 2012 Great ideas! What is TPH? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j express Posted July 25, 2012 Share #82 Posted July 25, 2012 TPH stands for trains per hour for anyone who is wondering what it means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GojiMet86 Posted July 25, 2012 Share #83 Posted July 25, 2012 How is it TPH determined? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDTA Posted July 25, 2012 Author Share #84 Posted July 25, 2012 How is it TPH determined? Signal limitations, and switching. You can only have 30TPH per track. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSubwayStation Posted July 25, 2012 Share #85 Posted July 25, 2012 Basically, TPH (Trains Per Hour) is a unit of measuring the frequency of trains. The TPH is the number of trains that would pass you in an hour if trains were running at a particular frequency. There can't be too many trains (too high a TPH) on a particular track or else trains will get too close together, and get delayed by the signal system (to prevent crashes). This is often a concern when people say, "Why can't this line run more frequently?", without realizing that delays would result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quill Depot Posted July 25, 2012 Share #86 Posted July 25, 2012 Thanks! Adding an express might help CPW in general. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lance Posted July 25, 2012 Share #87 Posted July 25, 2012 How would adding another express on Central Park West help anything? There's already the A and D, both of which run express every day. The talk of running the B is to help the C line, which is the sole local on the weekends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTimer Posted July 26, 2012 Share #88 Posted July 26, 2012 The express bypasses all of CPW BTW, lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RollOver Posted July 26, 2012 Share #89 Posted July 26, 2012 The has a ten minute interval throughout the day when it operates. On weekdays, there's the as a supplement on CPW Local. The and are the only 24/7 lines that don't share a track with any other line in the NYCS. That's why CBTC is an implementation for them with new rail cars. But not only that but due to ridership. It's impossible for trains to arrive within every minute or second. It has to be 6-10 minutes. The can come once-twice for the weekend rush hours since many here are saying CPW Local stops are crowded so I'm suggesting this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTimer Posted July 26, 2012 Share #90 Posted July 26, 2012 Well they're crowded, but most of the time its not even a full length train running. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted July 26, 2012 Share #91 Posted July 26, 2012 How would adding another express on Central Park West help anything? There's already the A and D, both of which run express every day. The talk of running the B is to help the C line, which is the sole local on the weekends.The express bypasses all of CPW BTW, lol The way I was thinking about this lurking through the pages in this discussion, that even as you've said that adding express service along the A or the D lines may not necessarily in itself help congestion along the CPW and its local stations, that's a given, but what about service in the Bronx for example? That D train is horrendously crowded during a weekend run and thats before it even travels out of the Bronx. (Or back uptown to 205th) In the indirect sense of adding more service for the sake of Bronx riders trying to get downtown it should benefit weekend riders overall somehow? Well then again the idea of weekend B train service would be great. If it was to serve Bronx riders as well. Even if there was to be no express service in the Bronx on weekends with two services on the Grand Concourse line that would be still total win for people dependant on the CPW to get around on weekends. From the Bronx at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreatOne2k Posted July 27, 2012 Share #92 Posted July 27, 2012 The way I was thinking about this lurking through the pages in this discussion, that even as you've said that adding express service along the A or the D lines may not necessarily in itself help congestion along the CPW and its local stations, that's a given, but what about service in the Bronx for example? That D train is horrendously crowded during a weekend run and thats before it even travels out of the Bronx. (Or back uptown to 205th) In the indirect sense of adding more service for the sake of Bronx riders trying to get downtown it should benefit weekend riders overall somehow? Well then again the idea of weekend B train service would be great. If it was to serve Bronx riders as well. Even if there was to be no express service in the Bronx on weekends with two services on the Grand Concourse line that would be still total win for people dependant on the CPW to get around on weekends. From the Bronx at least. Any weekend service to the Bronx should end at 167 St. Although Tremont Ave would be a better place to turn the (though cheaper than Bedford Park). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTimer Posted July 27, 2012 Share #93 Posted July 27, 2012 Cheapest is no trains. Full length and a lower headway for the Bronx. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cotb16 Posted July 27, 2012 Share #94 Posted July 27, 2012 Cheapest is no trains. Full length and a lower headway for the Bronx. I think that would be the best idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trainmaster5 Posted July 28, 2012 Share #95 Posted July 28, 2012 Wasn't there a "doomsday" scenario decades ago where the MTA or NYCTA was proposing to do away with the Jerome Line overnights and force people to use the IND Concourse line? With that line of thinking I can't see the B heading up CPW on weekends. I'd say Two Timer's proposal is the best one could hope for and it makes the most sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quill Depot Posted July 28, 2012 Share #96 Posted July 28, 2012 Oh maybe a for skip-stop. You could use skipstop on CPW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Threxx Posted July 28, 2012 Share #97 Posted July 28, 2012 Oh maybe a for skip-stop. You could use skipstop on CPW. No you can't, because people travel b/w stations on CPW, perfect example is people going to the museum. That'd solve nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSubwayStation Posted July 28, 2012 Share #98 Posted July 28, 2012 Oh maybe a for skip-stop. You could use skipstop on CPW. The goal is to make the train less crowded, not to make it faster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q10 Airport Posted July 28, 2012 Share #99 Posted July 28, 2012 Well they're crowded, but most of the time its not even a full length train running. That is an excellent point. They only have 8 cars per train when the R32's are running. During the summer, however, they run full length with the R46's. Have the weekend trains been crowded when the full length R46's are used? If not, that may be the solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTimer Posted July 28, 2012 Share #100 Posted July 28, 2012 The loading is full (not crushed but certainately quite a few standees), its not near crush loaded like when its 8 cars of R32 (everybody fits on the train, but the c/r has some difficulty closing down in a timely fashion to keep with the timetable). The train empties somewhat at 59, then fills up again by time it gets down to W4 (at 34 they choose the because the combined headway is more than the , and most of the customers are not going past downtown Brooklyn). Then it empties out again, and its comfortable (seats available except the first two cars) the rest of the way to Euclid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.