Pols: Let’s make a spot for the G train

[R32 3838]

^Ignoring the foamerizm...

How Is that foamerizm, Thats the only damn choice they will Have if they were to make the 8 cars (6 car R46's), they aren't gonna make them 8 car R160A's (4 car units) due to the fact both CI/Jamaica both has 5 car R160's and they would mix em up

 

I rode the train for over 18 years and i rerember when they made it 4 cars from 6 75 footers and 8 car R32's (they also ran 10 car R32's as well)

 

and that part about how the TA would take trains out of storage is true, 4 R32's just came from storage (ENY yard) one of the pairs went in service ( it was accidental) if they make the 600" trains then they will have to grab some cars out of storage (R32's and R42's) due to the SPARE factor on the since the has the A-A R46's, ITS ABOUT DAMN time the gets some type of service increase and more cars added, if the move goes through this WILL effect the most of the B divsion 

 

and the reason why i said 8 Car R32's as well is due to spares, Like GC stated in his comment there aren't enough A-A R46's around PLUS 6206-07 is a parts car no way in hell that will enter service again

 

 

and for the ones to say the doesn't need added service, STFU, and ride it, 4 car R68's doesn't cut it no more, the needs more cars point blank, the ridership is getting high on that line

[checkmatechamp13]

You have to understand how many years ago that was. That was in the 20's. And then, the IRT and BMT ran into money trouble...

 

Nowadays, the does not produce much profit and does not run through many dense areas. Plus, your average train is kind of empty.

 

Define "not dense". Because basically all of those areas along the line are above the citywide average density of roughly 30,000 ppsm. (Not to mention, NYC is the densest big city in the country, so that means those areas are even denser relative to the rest of the country).

[lilbluefoxie]

Now I understand that theres no room for the at Continental Ave during the week, but is there any chance of the returning there on the weekends and late nights?

[RollOver]

I heard it was because many riders on the IND Queens Boulevard Line want service to Manhattan but very less riders use the for Brooklyn service. If that's the case, then there's no need for the on Queens Boulevard. On the weekends, give the entire route the service boost instead. Queens Boulevard rides can change at Court Square from the or the .

[Threxx]

Bear in mind that the loading guideline for an R68 during rush hours is 175 people. That's per car. I think most of us would consider that quite crowded, but that's the guideline that NYCT schedules for. If, at the most crowded point on the line, the average car of the average train (averaged over an hour, I think, or maybe a half hour) is carrying less than 175 people, there's no need to add more service.

 

If there's been a severe service delay, it's possible that one train is crush loaded. Chances are there's another train right behind it that's much emptier.

 

And given the short trains, the end cars tend to be more crowded than the middle cars. Even if the end cars are overcrowded on a particular train, the train as a whole probably isn't.

 

The off-peak loading guideline is for 125% of a seated load. Since an R68 has about 75 seats, a fully loaded car has 94 passengers. I'm not sure I've ever seen an off-peak G train with as many as 94 passengers per car.

 

Let me ask you then: do you take the regularly? I would assume not, if you're making these statements...

 

The that was crushloaded was preceded by a train that had left about 6-7 minutes earlier. I don't think that train was much less crowded. This shows you the volume of ridership. "guidelines" are BS, you really need to ride the line to get a senesce of things.

 

As for off peak, I've been on trains that have had more than 94 passengers per car off peak, especially on Saturdays. It isn't unheard of.

 

To those criticizing the call for extra service: You try cramming into a 4 car train every morning and see how fun that is... 

[Fresh Pond]

I ride that going to work 5 days a week at all times of the day (depends on what shift i actually work) and I can assure you, it does get pretty crowded. Plus since Barclays opened, the picks even more people at the Fulton St stop after events at the arena.

[Threxx]

Define "not dense". Because basically all of those areas along the line are above the citywide average density of roughly 30,000 ppsm. (Not to mention, NYC is the densest big city in the country, so that means those areas are even denser relative to the rest of the country).

 

Fort Greene, Bed-Stuy, Williamsburg and Greenpoint, all pretty dense areas.

[Grand Concourse]

 

I heard it was because many riders on the IND Queens Boulevard Line want service to Manhattan but very less riders use the for Brooklyn service. If that's the case, then there's no need for the on Queens Boulevard. On the weekends, give the entire route the service boost instead. Queens Boulevard rides can change at Court Square from the or the .

but the point is for ppl to get the G to the next express stop. Sure the E is fine, but the R is terrible. QB needs 2 local lines or more R trains on the queens end.

[RollOver]

but the point is for ppl to get the G to the next express stop. Sure the E is fine, but the R is terrible. QB needs 2 local lines or more R trains on the queens end.

Makes sense.

[realizm]

I ride that going to work 5 days a week at all times of the day (depends on what shift i actually work) and I can assure you, it does get pretty crowded. Plus since Barclays opened, the picks even more people at the Fulton St stop after events at the arena.

 

Must be because of all the authentic restaurants in that area ppl go to after events. 

[realizm]

but the point is for ppl to get the G to the next express stop. Sure the E is fine, but the R is terrible. QB needs 2 local lines or more R trains on the queens end.

 

Then the only option you got is the to Forest Hills which will not happen because or bottlenecking problems at Forest Hills as itmaybeok pointed out. Unless we make the local or do a swap (Which again will never ever happen because of the residents of Jamaica, Elmhurst, Fresh Meadows, Sunnyside, Jackson Heights, Flushing, Briarwood, Forest Hills, Kew Gardens, Bayside, LIC and Astoria used to the current configuration along the the two routes on the QBL)

 

Catch 22.

 

The 53rd St tube can take but so many TPH and multiple routes simultaneously. Then there will be the lack of available rolling stock you yourself mentioned. It would be something of a challenge for Jamaica Yard to accomodate the changes on top of that. 

 

You know the rest on the rolling stock involved. Feel free to critique my reasoning on this. I may be missing some important things that needs to be brought to the table here for careful consideration. (Such as adding trains on the which again is not feasible as the 60th Street tunnel is at capacity)

[checkmatechamp13]

Fort Greene, Bed-Stuy, Williamsburg and Greenpoint, all pretty dense areas.

 

Oh, believe me, I know. In fact, I can't think of an area along the route that's not dense. Maybe Gowanus by Smith/9th Street (though of course, you have all the people living in Red Hook who get off there), and then maybe parts of LIC, but that's about it.

[Grand Concourse]

Realizm: When I said the G, I mean late nights when the E is the only line running local and weekends when it is just the R. Basically when the M isn't there, QB has only 1 local line serving it. What I want is for QB to be 2 locals all the time like it used to be in the early part of the V's existence. No bottlenecks at all. I am well aware you can't run 3 locals at the same time to 71st.

[realizm]

Gotcha GC, misread your post. Well in that case I would agree then that we could use the weekend service. BTW, I've always wondered why the MTA never decided to implement that? It's obviously needed on the QBL (weekends and non-peak) which is the second busiest line there is in the system next to the Lexington Ave Line. It's not just the   riders who was shortchanged. Really the cutbacks on the shortchanged QBL riders in general in my opinion even as it stands the facts behind the difficult desision the agency had to make in regards to the opoening of the 63rd Street corridor into greater Queens.
 

[Grand Concourse]

It was an underhanded tactic because it always seems like there's not enough people voicing their concerns for the G as it hardly ran for several weekends towards the end of the V line; and the need to keep the G in Queens other times when there is only 1 local running. I think it's unlikely an E local on weekends would fly, but I don't see the MTA ever boosting R service even if they short turned at Canal or Whitehall, and thus the G is the best option imo.

[realizm]

That's a good idea! trains from Whitehall for added service, which can definitely be done but then again with the reluctance of the MTA to ever do so as you stated. Yeah they really should consider extending the . That was the original game plan, but of course they used these GO's that they implemented as a scapegoat to cut that weekend service to Forest Hills permanantly.

[Art Vandelay]

The turnover between Van Alst and 36th street was nearly 100%. There is not nor has there ever been (and likely there will never be) demand for G service on Queens Boulevard.

 

If  I were to guess, the most likely way for QB to get a second weekend local would be the M. Although the E being made local is also not out of the question. R service increases are also not out of the picture (in fact I'd have to say they are probably the most likely way QB gets another local!)

 

The most likely way for QB to get a second late night local is the restoration  of late night R service,  shortly followed by the F being  made local.

 

Regardless of what happens, if QB gets more local service, it won't have a G on the front of it. 

[realizm]

I've used the late night. There are quite a few who struggle from 21-Ely who would go to Court Square to catch the . You'll be quite suprised. Plus, the on weekends was in fact quite popular from personal experience living in Jamaica then Brooklyn Chinatown, either way necessitating my reliance on the if I don't want to be bothered with going through Manhattan. It was very convenient for many.

 

There was a public outcry from several neighboorhoods post 63rd Street connector debut for a reason....

[RollOver]

Of course bringing in the or is a better idea than playing bull with the and simply because of demand to Manhattan under a limited time frame.

[CenSin]

The issue with the is that there is no capacity on the Queens Boulevard line for it, and it is a fact that it will be a waste of resources because the Crosstown line will get disproportionately more service than there is demand for it. Had the MTA been able to successfully prod the feds into funding a separate line from Queensbridge–21 Street to eastern Queens decades ago there would be enough of a void on the Queens Boulevard line to justify bringing in the .

[realizm]

Ah yes, forgot about that, the Queens Super Express proposal. The original idea was to have 2nd Ave Line trains run on it. Evidence of that is the spurs seen on the Manhattan end of the 63rd Ave line right after Lex, going Queens-bound. (Not the one currently connected to Second Ave being constructed, the other spurs built to send trains downtown into SAS Phase 3 towards 34th Street, 14th, Seaport, etc.)
 

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

I've taken the once when on full length cars after sandy, and I gotta say, they are pretty well used. With an average of 23 riders, not bad. Court Square Sucks as a terminal. The extremely long passageway there and stuff irks me. However Court Square is the oy place you can terminate the trains for now.

 

I say go for the service increases. I Love how people rate extra service as unesscary even though they've never have take the ok e themselves. However, I prefer not to use the and use the B62 instead (a lot of people do that, actually), since most of the areas parallel or are near the .

[Art Vandelay]

Unless I am mistaken, the G had no more capacity post sandy than it does now. (If it did, such was not on the order of double.)

[4P3607]

Wow.... never knew that turning the at Continental would be such a problem.

 

I think it would be good if they send only a few s on QBL (especially during weekends), it takes alot longer now to get to the from Queens Blvd. Instead of me just getting on the at Woodhaven, I have to take the (which usually takes a while), then the , and alot of times by the time I get to the train platform at Court Sq a is pulling out...

 

Remember, when the did run on QBL It didn't run during rush hours! It ran to 71 all times except Rush hours (from what I see from this 2007 map). I think its good to send a few s on QBL during times when QBL local service isn't very frequent.

[Art Vandelay]

After 2001, the G ran on QB evenings nights and weekends only, turning at Court Square on weekdays and rush hours(and in reality, on weekends too, although this was not the official pattern.)

from 1997 or so to 2001, the G ran on QB Rush hours, middays, and evenings, turning at Court Square at other times. 

From 1990 or so to 1997, the G ran on QB all times except weekends, turning at Queens Plaza on weekends, 179 at night and Continental other times.