Jump to content

Total Loss at South Ferry ?


NYCTSignals

Recommended Posts

I do see your point. Is there any way to say it in a nice way. Was saying it in an offensive way necessary. Also what about leaving it alone. The only thing you want is a popular post!

 

 

TBH, I didnt find that offensive. He clearly stated everything just like everyone else (including me) would've said it. I find that more of "attacking" Wallyhorse's statement with his own statement, but it could've been worded better, you have a point.

 

Dude, with all the foam Wallyhorse has done, I wouldn't be surprised for someone to blow up on him. Pretty sure he didnt do it for a popular post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

That station just needs to be rebuilt entirely if it's gonna cost more to fix than it did to build. And this time, add waterproofing.

 

 

That is how the internet works. If people have problems with it then they shouldn't be on a forum in the first place.

 

Just because this is a forum doesn't mean it has to be the @sshole of the Internet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just because this is a forum doesn't mean it has to be the @sshole of the Internet.

 

 

So what kind of solution do you propose? Wally has been told off for his asinine proposals multiple times, and continues to ignore them - this isn't kindergarten, with sugar and butterflies; life doesn't work like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what kind of solution do you propose? Wally has been told off for his asinine proposals multiple times, and continues to ignore them - this isn't kindergarten, with sugar and butterflies; life doesn't work like that.

 

 

The thing is... fantasy proposals (foaming) are not a against the rules. It can't be reported as a "Bad post." For the forum rules click below:

 

http://www.nyctransitforums.com/rules/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

So what kind of solution do you propose? Wally has been told off for his asinine proposals multiple times, and continues to ignore them - this isn't kindergarten, with sugar and butterflies; life doesn't work like that.

 

Nobody's saying that this place has to be devoid of all criticism, but is there really a need to derail a whole thread because of someone's idea?

 

And no shit life doesn't work like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do see your point. Is there any way to say it in a nice way. Was saying it in an offensive way necessary. Also what about leaving it alone. The only thing you want is a popular post!

 

 

I do see Fresh Pond's point and I also see yours. I also view Wallyhorse as a fantasy foamer and I feel his BG shuttle idea is absurd. But Fresh Pond could of said it in a nicer way.

 

Edit: Pronoun unclear

 

 

Oh did I hurt your feelings? Is there something wrong with I said that offends you? Maybe I should apologize to the internet police for posting in an "offensive" manner. And why would I write something just to be popular on here? Im not getting some kind of congratulatory cookie or getting a shiny medal or something. I post what's on my mind, i dont sugarcoat anything

 

...but i do tone down my language to keep it PG-13 in here

 

 

...besides if I really wanted to be offensive, I would be banned from here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Folks:

 

My apologies if I do this a lot,. but my views seem to clearly come from a different point of view.

 

To me, the old SF platform should never have closed in the first place. The new (1) SF Station was DEFINITELY needed, but at the same time, in my view, work should have been done to get the short platform and all other work at BG necessary so when the (1) made its move to new SF, the Lexington Line could take over old SF.

 

Reviving the BG-SF shuttle is from a relative standpoint a small price to pay for what would easily be the biggest benefit: A major increase in off-peak service between Brooklyn Bridge and Bowling Green, an area of lower Manhattan that has seen a sharp rise in residential living in recent years. As I would do it with the re-opened old SF:

 

BG-SF shuttle runs ONLY when there is not enough capacity for the (6) to run to South Ferry AND the (4) and (5) are BOTH running to Brooklyn. This most likely would be 6:00 AM-7:30 PM or so Monday-Friday, but might even be able to be confined to rush hours (most likely 6:00-10:00 AM and 3:30-7:30 PM weekdays). (6) runs as it does now to BB when there is not enough capacity for it to run with the (4) / (5) between BB and BG. THIS BG-SF shuttle would run on the OUTER track at old SF, NOT the inner!

 

(6) would run to old SF (outer platform) at all other times!

 

(5) would also run to old SF (outer platform) evenings and weekends when running in Manhattan, but NOT to Brooklyn.

 

And as far as people not feeling comfortable walking late at night between BG and the Ferry, I would suspect based on my experiences in dealing with people over the years that it would be far higher than many think. I see people frequently looking to take cabs even in the evenings in the area I've worked in to go a handful of blocks even though the area in question is perfectly safe for walking and it's a walk I've done myself countless times with no problems ever. You can explain to them it's faster walking, but they would rather wait and pay the penalty for wanting to take a cab (which can sometimes be over a half-hour if not more). Based on that, I suspect if we did see old SF reopened with the (6) terminating there (EXCEPT when there isn't enough capacity for it to run between BB and BG, which would be the only times the BG-SF shuttle would run), especially during overnights, the (6) would be much more heavily ridden, especially by those looking for South Ferry, especially if they know at worse if they miss the (6), then can still get the (4) to BG and either wait there for the (6) or walk if they want to. That doesn't even bring into the equation the real benefit of much more evening and weekend service on the Lexington line in a part of lower Manhattan that would never have needed it the last time the old BG-SF shuttle ran (especially with DOUBLE service between BG and BB overnights, which greatly also benefits riders looking to make transfers at Fulton Street).

 

I realize the first five cars is an issue, but that could be rectified perhaps with a "double stop" at old SF (since it would be the terminal for the (5) and (6) during off-peak hours, (5) when not running to Brooklyn) where the first five cars would stop as was the case when the (1) used the terminal, then the train would close and move to where the rear five cars came into the station with those doors opened and closed before the train went back to Bowling Green.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most 1 riders heading to South Ferry simply walk from Rector. Transferring to the R takes longer, and the walk through the Fulton complex from the 2/3 to the 4/5 is probably longer than the walk from Rector to South Ferry!

 

 

It's because of what the (MTA) posted which is why I thought that. Whatever anyways, you're right...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Folks:

 

My apologies if I do this a lot,. but my views seem to clearly come from a different point of view.

 

To me, the old SF platform should never have closed in the first place. The new (1) SF Station was DEFINITELY needed, but at the same time, in my view, work should have been done to get the short platform and all other work at BG necessary so when the (1) made its move to new SF, the Lexington Line could take over old SF.

 

Reviving the BG-SF shuttle is from a relative standpoint a small price to pay for what would easily be the biggest benefit: A major increase in off-peak service between Brooklyn Bridge and Bowling Green, an area of lower Manhattan that has seen a sharp rise in residential living in recent years. As I would do it with the re-opened old SF:

 

BG-SF shuttle runs ONLY when there is not enough capacity for the (6) to run to South Ferry AND the (4) and (5) are BOTH running to Brooklyn. This most likely would be 6:00 AM-7:30 PM or so Monday-Friday, but might even be able to be confined to rush hours (most likely 6:00-10:00 AM and 3:30-7:30 PM weekdays). (6) runs as it does now to BB when there is not enough capacity for it to run with the (4) / (5) between BB and BG. THIS BG-SF shuttle would run on the OUTER track at old SF, NOT the inner!

 

(6) would run to old SF (outer platform) at all other times!

 

(5) would also run to old SF (outer platform) evenings and weekends when running in Manhattan, but NOT to Brooklyn.

 

And as far as people not feeling comfortable walking late at night between BG and the Ferry, I would suspect based on my experiences in dealing with people over the years that it would be far higher than many think. I see people frequently looking to take cabs even in the evenings in the area I've worked in to go a handful of blocks even though the area in question is perfectly safe for walking and it's a walk I've done myself countless times with no problems ever. You can explain to them it's faster walking, but they would rather wait and pay the penalty for wanting to take a cab (which can sometimes be over a half-hour if not more). Based on that, I suspect if we did see old SF reopened with the (6) terminating there (EXCEPT when there isn't enough capacity for it to run between BB and BG, which would be the only times the BG-SF shuttle would run), especially during overnights, the (6) would be much more heavily ridden, especially by those looking for South Ferry, especially if they know at worse if they miss the (6), then can still get the (4) to BG and either wait there for the (6) or walk if they want to. That doesn't even bring into the equation the real benefit of much more evening and weekend service on the Lexington line in a part of lower Manhattan that would never have needed it the last time the old BG-SF shuttle ran (especially with DOUBLE service between BG and BB overnights, which greatly also benefits riders looking to make transfers at Fulton Street).

 

I realize the first five cars is an issue, but that could be rectified perhaps with a "double stop" at old SF (since it would be the terminal for the (5) and (6) during off-peak hours, (5) when not running to Brooklyn) where the first five cars would stop as was the case when the (1) used the terminal, then the train would close and move to where the rear five cars came into the station with those doors opened and closed before the train went back to Bowling Green.

 

You still don't get it, do you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets make one thing clear, to any of you who don't seem to get it. Foaming is apparently NOT, and I repeat, NOT wanted OR appreciated here any longer. We respect your opinions and your points of view, whatever they may be, but if what your proposing is completely impractical and absurd, then ONCE is all we need to see and read it. Grow up like the rest of us and MOVE on. In the process you may save some of the members here from heart attacks, and other members (like myself) from having to read all of this inane crap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Replies in RED

 

Folks:

 

My apologies if I do this a lot,. but my views seem to clearly come from a different point of view.

 

To me, the old SF platform should never have closed in the first place. The new (1) SF Station was DEFINITELY needed, but at the same time, in my view, work should have been done to get the short platform and all other work at BG necessary so when the (1) made its move to new SF, the Lexington Line could take over old SF.

 

Reviving the BG-SF shuttle is from a relative standpoint a small price to pay for what would easily be the biggest benefit: A major increase in off-peak service between Brooklyn Bridge and Bowling Green, an area of lower Manhattan that has seen a sharp rise in residential living in recent years. As I would do it with the re-opened old SF:

 

The walk is not very far at all.

 

BG-SF shuttle runs ONLY when there is not enough capacity for the (6) to run to South Ferry AND the (4) and (5) are BOTH running to Brooklyn. This most likely would be 6:00 AM-7:30 PM or so Monday-Friday, but might even be able to be confined to rush hours (most likely 6:00-10:00 AM and 3:30-7:30 PM weekdays). (6) runs as it does now to BB when there is not enough capacity for it to run with the (4) / (5) between BB and BG. THIS BG-SF shuttle would run on the OUTER track at old SF, NOT the inner!

 

Even during weekends and other times the 6 would have to merge with the 4 and 5, a hard thing to do

 

(6) would run to old SF (outer platform) at all other times!

 

See above statement

 

(5) would also run to old SF (outer platform) evenings and weekends when running in Manhattan, but NOT to Brooklyn.

 

The 5 is better off running to Brooklyn due to the crowds there.

 

And as far as people not feeling comfortable walking late at night between BG and the Ferry, I would suspect based on my experiences in dealing with people over the years that it would be far higher than many think. I see people frequently looking to take cabs even in the evenings in the area I've worked in to go a handful of blocks even though the area in question is perfectly safe for walking and it's a walk I've done myself countless times with no problems ever. You can explain to them it's faster walking, but they would rather wait and pay the penalty for wanting to take a cab (which can sometimes be over a half-hour if not more). It's downtown Manhattan... It's not Bed-Stuy. Based on that, I suspect if we did see old SF reopened with the (6) terminating there (EXCEPT when there isn't enough capacity for it to run between BB and BG, which would be the only times the BG-SF shuttle would run), especially during overnights, the (6) would be much more heavily ridden, especially by those looking for South Ferry, especially if they know at worse if they miss the (6), then can still get the (4) to BG and either wait there for the (6) or walk if they want to. That doesn't even bring into the equation the real benefit of much more evening and weekend service on the Lexington line in a part of lower Manhattan that would never have needed it the last time the old BG-SF shuttle ran (especially with DOUBLE service between BG and BB overnights, which greatly also benefits riders looking to make transfers at Fulton Street).

 

Why run the 6 to South Ferry at late-nights. There isn't enough demand.

 

I realize the first five cars is an issue, but that could be rectified perhaps with a "double stop" at old SF (since it would be the terminal for the (5) and (6) during off-peak hours, (5) when not running to Brooklyn) where the first five cars would stop as was the case when the (1) used the terminal, then the train would close and move to where the rear five cars came into the station with those doors opened and closed before the train went back to Bowling Green.

 

It's a great idea for a train running to South Ferry to "double-stop" but there isn't enough time.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually they would have little to do with each other. Prior to the opening of the new South Ferry station in '09, both the 1 and 5 would use either of the two loops to turn around. The 1 would use the outer loop, which it currently is using to return uptown while the 5 would use the inner loop, which hasn't seen passenger service since the '70s.

 

@Wallyhorse: I have to appreciate your "enthusiasm". Yeah, let's go with that one. You're obviously not one to back down from your ideas, even when everyone else has told you time and again that they won't work. You gotta respect that. However, with that said, it's because you keep repeating these ideas and suggestions, verbatim mind you, regardless of how implausible, impractical or just plain unnecessary they are, that people are getting quite annoyed with you. It was cute at first, but now, it's gotten to the point of trolling or spamming. Several of the other members on this forum, myself included, have explained in excruciating detail why your proposals, this one in particular, won't or can't work. I'd run through it again, but I'm pressed for time and quite frankly, I'm tired of repeating myself. If you need an answer as to why, just look at one of your posts and look at the immediate responses following that post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Wallyhorse: I have to appreciate your "enthusiasm". Yeah, let's go with that one. You're obviously not one to back down from your ideas, even when everyone else has told you time and again that they won't work. You gotta respect that. However, with that said, it's because you keep repeating these ideas and suggestions, verbatim mind you, regardless of how implausible, impractical or just plain unnecessary they are, that people are getting quite annoyed with you. It was cute at first, but now, it's gotten to the point of trolling or spamming. Several of the other members on this forum, myself included, have explained in excruciating detail why your proposals, this one in particular, won't or can't work. I'd run through it again, but I'm pressed for time and quite frankly, I'm tired of repeating myself. If you need an answer as to why, just look at one of your posts and look at the immediate responses following that post.

 

LMAO!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With respect to the damage to the current South Ferry station, how in the world would having the old south ferry station still under passenger service changed matters? As if to say, the old station wouldn't have been damaged....

 

In plain english, what exactly does the old South ferry station have to do with anything right now....

Tell all the people disembarking & walking from Rector to points south about some old south ferry station......

 

As was already alluded to by FanRailer & Lance, that post of Wallyhorse was simply made to reiterate the same crap that he's been doing, and nothing more.... talkin about some "my views seem to clearly come from a different point of view."....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Folks:

 

My apologies if I do this a lot,. but my views seem to clearly come from a different point of view.

 

A point of view that is

 

A. unique to you

 

and

 

B. incomprehensible to everyone else.

 

The old loop station was not "future proof". it was not ment to handle the potential that major changes would arise in how the subway was run. It was not ment for anything that wasn't a Composiste/Hi V/Low V and half the length of a modern train. If they had bothered to build the station on a gentler curve with a longer platform, then it would probibly still be open. But the need to move the most people in the most effiecent manner possible trumps your nostalgic feelings, and those feelings are not an excuse to make stuff up to try and justfy them.

 

The moment the tunnel to brooklyn opened, Lexington service has always prioritzed the run to brooklyn. Once the West side line opened, the shuttle's nessestiy took a nose dive, why they kept it that long is beyond me. All it did was carry people who didn't want to walk. it's not like it provided a nessisary connection for subway service, the two loop platforms were NEVER in the same fare control.

you're trying to take everything that was wrong with the 1 for so long and make it be a problem for the east side line. It's like freeing someone's arm from under a rock, only to order someone else to stick thier arm in and then drop the rock on them...

 

It just doesn't make any sense. What are you going to do next? Try to convince them to reopen City Hall..?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, the likelihood of the SF loop reopening as a temporary station is very slim. People have accepted that the South Ferry station has been severely damaged and that it will take time to rebuild. The Rector walk is not bad. It really isn't. And now that the (R)'s running its normal route again, the headways at Whitehall Street aren't as long anymore. Yes, it sucks that Sandy created a lot of devastation, but when you look at other transit systems in the area itching just to restore service on their lines, the MTA would look silly spending money to open a disfunctional loop station.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.