Why can't there be 10 min headways for the two Queens branches on the (A)?

[Grand Concourse]

Imo, the only way to improve the is to make the line shorter and having Howard Beach be the terminal for the and Far Rock . Split the lines and then you can run the service the Rockaway needs without the mess of the getting severely backed up somewhere b/w 207th and HB.

But all kidding aside, there's nothing much that can be done. Lefferts has about the same ridership as nearly all of the Rockaways combined sans some of the major stops like Far Rockaway and Howard Beach. As imperfect as it is, I'd just leave things alone. Lefferts maybe 3 stops, but those stops are thru fairly densely populated areas, unlike the Rockaways, so why shaft them?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Imo, the only way to improve the is to make the line shorter and having Howard Beach be the terminal for the and Far Rock . Split the lines and then you can run the service the Rockaway needs without the mess of the getting severely backed up somewhere b/w 207th and HB.

But all kidding aside, there's nothing much that can be done. Lefferts has about the same ridership as nearly all of the Rockaways combined sans some of the major stops like Far Rockaway and Howard Beach. As imperfect as it is, I'd just leave things alone. Lefferts maybe 3 stops, but those stops are thru fairly densely populated areas, unlike the Rockaways, so why shaft them?

 

Not only that but for some reason I get the feeling that the tries to discourage folks from jumping on the express trains. Generally speaking (going solely by personal observations and not the actual schedules), local trains have better frequencies than express trains when in reality I think some express lines would have higher usage if they ran better and were timed better with the locals. Of course that means uneven loading because just about everyone who could would ditch the local train would, since the thinking is that express has to be faster. Sometimes that's true and sometimes it's not.

 

The one thing IMO that would help is newer trains on both the and . The frequencies seem much worse especially on the because the line does have some of the oldest cars in the system. Add that to the switching of tracks and so on and the frequencies seem even worse.

[RollOver]

One can't say that the Lefferts branch has lower ridership like many of the Rockaway branch stations. It has to be the merits and demands of residents around that area and the population of the hood itself. If Howard Beach was as big as Clifford the Big Red Dog, I'd say beef some service to 10 minute headways instead of the current 20. I'm convince the only reason why some here are saying that Lefferts branch has the same lower ridership is because of how the set up the scheduled frequency for both branches of the route, making riders have to use a bus or whatever that runs parallel with the Liberty Avenue Line in Queens. The Rockaways and Broad Channel I can understand though...........

[Threxx]

The one thing IMO that would help is newer trains on both the and . The frequencies seem much worse especially on the because the line does have some of the oldest cars in the system. Add that to the switching of tracks and so on and the frequencies seem even worse.

 

 

The cars have nothing to do with the frequencies of the . The has the second oldest cars in the system, and it runs at 20 TPH at peak times...

 

On the contrary, the and have the newest cars in the system but are only 14 TPH combined. Some food for thought.

[Grand Concourse]

Not only that but for some reason I get the feeling that the tries to discourage folks from jumping on the express trains. Generally speaking (going solely by personal observations and not the actual schedules), local trains have better frequencies than express trains when in reality I think some express lines would have higher usage if they ran better and were timed better with the locals. Of course that means uneven loading because just about everyone who could would ditch the local train would, since the thinking is that express has to be faster. Sometimes that's true and sometimes it's not.

 

The one thing IMO that would help is newer trains on both the and . The frequencies seem much worse especially on the because the line does have some of the oldest cars in the system. Add that to the switching of tracks and so on and the frequencies seem even worse.

 

The types of trains they run is meaningless. The when it had R32s was very consistent. The problem is the length. The longer the line, the more chances there will be some problem along the way. Then of course you add in all the merging and additional lines sharing the same tracks... So older trains aren't the issue.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

One can't say that the Lefferts branch has lower ridership like many of the Rockaway branch stations. It has to be the merits and demands of residents around that area and the population of the hood itself. If Howard Beach was as big as Clifford the Big Red Dog, I'd say beef some service to 10 minute headways instead of the current 20. I'm convince the only reason why some here are saying that Lefferts branch has the same lower ridership is because of how the set up the scheduled frequency for both branches of the route, making riders have to use a bus or whatever that runs parallel with the Liberty Avenue Line in Queens. The Rockaways and Broad Channel I can understand though...........

 

You also have to take into consideration that those two branches become one one they leave their respective branches, so quite frankly the argument could be made that service could be overkill, though for the folks in those areas they would surely disagree. Also couldn't more service just cause more backups on the anyway? We had this conversation about the in another thread and I believe that was brought up.

 

The cars have nothing to do with the frequencies of the . The has the second oldest cars in the system, and it runs at 20 TPH at peak times...

 

On the contrary, the and have the newest cars in the system but are only 14 TPH combined. Some food for thought.

 

Sure they do... We're talking about how long waits are in between trains. Older cars usually means more break downs which means longer waits. Customers on the for example gave the line low marks because they said that the waits were long and the feeling was that part of the long waits were associated with the older cars and break downs. Whether or not that is true is another issue, but at least that's the case from a perception stand point.

 

 

The types of trains they run is meaningless. The when it had R32s was very consistent. The problem is the length. The longer the line, the more chances there will be some problem along the way. Then of course you add in all the merging and additional lines sharing the same tracks... So older trains aren't the issue.

 

Hmm... I don't know if customers would agree with your statement. When the had the R32s folks complained much like they do about the , saying that it wasn't reliable and so on. Like I said it's all about perception.

[Grand Concourse]

'Feeling' is not the same as an actual breakdown. Like I said before, R32s ran fine on the for years. Those trains wouldn't be packed like sardines if people didn't think the train itself was reliable. So please, enough about the old cars are bad bias. If it runs, I'm taking it, regardless of what train type shows up.

[Threxx]

Sure they do... We're talking about how long waits are in between trains. Older cars usually means more break downs which means longer waits. Customers on the for example gave the line low marks because they said that the waits were long and the feeling was that part of the long waits were associated with the older cars and break downs. Whether or not that is true is another issue, but at least that's the case from a perception stand point.

 

 

What the riders "feel" may not necessarily be the case. They aren't all railfans who try to get the latest information.

 

Here's the March 2012 MBDF: (The R32's are better than the R142A's, more food for thought)

 

[RollOver]

Okay, maybe more service on the will cause capacity at 207th Street IMO. So the only way you can have trains run every five minutes west of Rockaway Boulevard is if you had either the trains coming to or from Far Rockaway or Lefferts Boulevard terminate at Dyckman and the other at 207th Streets.

 

Anyways, my fault because I believe there are more demands for Manhattan service at the AM rush hour and more demands for Queens service at the PM rush hour, which explains why I always see 3 or 5 minute 's in the reverse direction with some trains ending at 168th or Dyckman Streets. I will try harder to learn more about the line, though I don't see why some trains end at 168th in the morning rush hour...

[Via Garibaldi 8]

'Feeling' is not the same as an actual breakdown. Like I said before, R32s ran fine on the for years. Those trains wouldn't be packed like sardines if people didn't think the train itself was reliable. So please, enough about the old cars are bad bias. If it runs, I'm taking it, regardless of what train type shows up.

 

That's true, but the reality is most passengers don't think like you do. Furthermore, I think you are giving your opinion rather than actual facts. I think the new cars on the has certainly helped and the line seems more reliable than before based again on observations and from taking the line with the new cars versus the R32s. I would like to see the track record for breakdowns on the when it had R32s as well as the since we're on the topic... I do certainly recall numerous complaints about the when it had R32s...

 

 

What the riders "feel" may not necessarily be the case. They aren't all railfans who try to get the latest information.

 

Here's the March 2012 MBDF: (The R32's are better than the R142A's, more food for thought)

 

 

 

Source please??? And yes that's correct. Surely riders outnumber railfans by far so perception is indeed important since that also can impact crowding levels on trains and cause back ups/delays.

[ttcsubwayfan]

Customers on the for example gave the line low marks because they said that the waits were long and the feeling was that part of the long waits were associated with the older cars and break downs.

 

 

Bloody arm chair critics.

 

The R32s will be out of here in 2017. That's done and over with. It's not going to happen sooner than that, I can promise you.

[Grand Concourse]

That's true, but the reality is most passengers don't think like you do. Furthermore, I think you are giving your opinion rather than actual facts. I think the new cars on the has certainly helped and the line seems more reliable than before based again on observations and from taking the line with the new cars versus the R32s. I would like to see the track record for breakdowns on the when it had R32s as well as the since we're on the topic... I do certainly recall numerous complaints about the when it had R32s...

 

Well sure a train that's ~5 yrs old vs one that's ~40 yrs old is going to do better... but the point is I think you are overblowing the unreliability of the older cars because of the 'newer is better' mindset. If all the R32s were retired right now, then life moves on. I don't care what runs as long as I get to point b without an incident.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Well sure a train that's ~5 yrs old vs one that's ~40 yrs old is going to do better... but the point is I think you are overblowing the unreliability of the older cars because of the 'newer is better' mindset. If all the R32s were retired right now, then life moves on. I don't care what runs as long as I get to point b without an incident.

 

I'm just saying that that mentality is out there and there is nothing that any of us can do to change that for the average customer and since they're the majority riding, surely it can have an effect on how reliable cars are. You guys can get pissed all you want about it, but that's what it is.

 

 

Bloody arm chair critics.

 

The R32s will be out of here in 2017. That's done and over with. It's not going to happen sooner than that, I can promise you.

 

And quite frankly I don't see or service improving much until then because I certainly don't see any serious increases in frequencies on either line anytime soon unless there is a huge population boom in the next 5 or so years. But who knows... The was a line that ranked pretty low too with older cars and what was seen as poor frequencies and now the line has new cars and better frequencies, so something may change, but I don't see anything happening soon. I would welcome the new cars and increased frequencies though. Every time an comes I always run to get it because I don't know when the next one will come.

[Threxx]

Source please??? And yes that's correct. Surely riders outnumber railfans by far so perception is indeed important since that also can impact crowding levels on trains and cause back ups/delays.

 

 

That's official MTA data. Direct from the March 2012 report. It was a screenshot.

 

Rider perception doesn't always follow the truth, I never said it wasn't important.

[ttcsubwayfan]

I'm just saying that that mentality is out there and there is nothing that any of us can do to change that for the average customer and since they're the majority riding, surely it can have an affect on how reliable cars are. You guys can get pissed all you want about it, but that's what it is.

 

 

The majority of the customers being average riders has an effect on how reliable cars are?

 

Can you please explain to me how on Earth this works?

[Grand Concourse]

I'm just saying that that mentality is out there and there is nothing that any of us can do to change that for the average customer and since they're the majority riding, surely it can have an affect on how reliable cars are. You guys can get pissed all you want about it, but that's what it is.

 

Who's pissed off? The only one making the big fuss is you in your desire for the R32s to be retired. Hey if you have $500 mil to buy a brand new fleet of trains to replace the R32s, then all the power to you. Till then, you'll have to put up with those old tin cans for a few more years

[Threxx]

Who's pissed off? The only one making the big fuss is you in your desire for the R32s to be retired. Hey if you have $500 mil to buy a brand new fleet of trains to replace the R32s, then all the power to you. Till then, you'll have to put up with those old tin cans for a few more years

 

 

Even if he did have the money, it'd still take a few years for the new cars to be built anyway...

[RollOver]

I'm not really getting you VG8, so you're saying that SMEEs will always be unreliable while the NTTs are far superior...? What about the R62/62As and R68/68As which are in their late 20s and rank right behind the NTTs...?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Who's pissed off? The only one making the big fuss is you in your desire for the R32s to be retired. Hey if you have $500 mil to buy a brand new fleet of trains to replace the R32s, then all the power to you. Till then, you'll have to put up with those old tin cans for a few more years

 

Don't look at me... I'm just simply iterating what many riders have already stated.

 

 

The majority of the customers being average riders has an effect on how reliable cars are?

 

Can you please explain to me how on Earth this works?

 

Thanks for the correction... Doing too many things at once... Yeah well let's see... One complaint was a lack of AC on some trains, so you had folks moving from car to car which I've done myself... Get enough people doing that and yes the train will be held up. That's just one example that comes to mind.

 

I'm not really getting you VG8, so you're saying that SMEEs will always be unreliable while the NTTs are far superior...? What about the R62/62As and R68/68As which are in their late 20s and rank right behind the NTTs...?

 

All I'm saying is that the perception of the average rider is that NEW=better. Nothing more nothing less.

[ttcsubwayfan]

Don't look at me... I'm just simply iterating what many riders have already stated.

 

Well, unfortunately, what riders have to say is not Word of God, and they rank among the F the MTA morons who think they're entitled to a free ride as some of the most annoying people in the subway. They can complain all they want but the R179s will be here in 2017, not when some armchair critic demands that they be.

 

Thanks for the correction... Doing too many things at once... Yeah well let's see... One complaint was a lack of AC on some trains, so you had folks moving from car to car which I've done myself... Get enough people doing that and yes the train will be held up.

 

 

Or you could have a C/R like Snowblock who would just shut those people out of the train.

 

And I hate to break it to you, but NTTs can have sh*tty A/C too. It's different for every car.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Well, unfortunately, what riders have to say is not Word of God, and they rank among the F the MTA morons who think they're entitled to a free ride.

 

While that may be true, the can't simply ignore feedback of the customers, otherwise there is no point in doing any surveys in the first place. Not only that but in some instances there is political pressure involved as well, as folks start writing to their representatives to see improvements. Getting back to this whole frequency issue of the , if it is that big of an issue, then I wonder if folks have been making a stink to their representatives...

[RollOver]

As stated time and time again, scheduled frequency of a public train or bus are determined by a public transit agency (the people in it themselves). A public train or bus car equipment doesn't have anything to do with the determined scheduled frequency.....

[ttcsubwayfan]

All I'm saying is that the perception of the average rider is that NEW=better. Nothing more nothing less.

 

 

Not necessarily. Most people I know of will be pleased with whatever they get so long as the vehicle is clean and it gets them to places.

 

While that may be true, the can't simply ignore feedback of the customers, otherwise there is no point in doing any surveys in the first place.

 

 

But what can the MTA do? If they rush Bombardier to get the R179s here quickly than they may not be the best quality that they could be, and when those break down then the riders will complain even more. You just can't please some people.

[Threxx]

While that may be true, the can't simply ignore feedback of the customers, otherwise there is no point in doing any surveys in the first place. Not only that but in some instances there is political pressure involved as well, as folks start writing to their representatives to see improvements. Getting back to this whole frequency issue of the , if it is that big of an issue, then I wonder if folks have been making a stink to their representatives...

 

 

You do realize the order has been placed on the R179's to replace the R32's?? You got your wish.... there is no money to retire every single SMEE car at once.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

As stated time and time again, scheduled frequency of a public train or bus are determined by a public transit agency (the people in it themselves). A public train or bus car equipment doesn't have anything to do with the determined scheduled frequency.....

 

Read... I never said that it determined the frequency... I talked about reliability and how long one has to wait... I've waited a good 20 minutes for an train at times, while the frequency was 10 minutes... Two different things.

 

But what can the MTA do? If they rush Bombardier to get the R179s here quickly than they may not be the best quality that they could be, and when those break down then the riders will complain even more. You just can't please some people.

 

They can make it a priority to see that those cars are delivered as quickly as possible. I can assure you that the will continue to be ranked as the worst line for years to come until that line gets new cars. Mark my words.