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

[Metro CSW]

Just needed to hit that 1,500 post milestone, did ya real?

[bobtehpanda]

Looks like the IND couldn't ignore that stop and had to find some way to get in on the action even if it meant connecting the station from an entire avenue away.

 

The IND's (well, Mayor Hylan's) refusal to coordinate with the IRT/BMT has had negative consequences when it comes to transfer hubs - look at QBP, Queens Plaza and 21st St-Queensbridge, or the lack of any IND connection to Atlantic Terminal. Times Square seems to be the only exception, but at the very least Atlantic should not have been an oversight.

[realizm]

Just needed to hit that 1,500 post milestone, did ya real?

 

I did? Lol I did'nt even know until I saw your post! Do I get a prize for this?

 

 

I could use a new iPad or something...

[Metro CSW]

I did? Lol I did'nt even know until I saw your post! Do I get a prize for this?

 

 

I could use a new iPad or something...

I wish.

[realizm]

I wish.

 

Pardon me as I hide under a rock and cry now for making so many dupe posts I had no idea I even made. *embarrased*

[Metro CSW]

Pardon me as I hide under a rock and cry now for making so many dupe posts I had no idea I even made. *embarrased*

Don't let it bother ya, bro. Now, let's get back on topic.

[Threxx]

For the past month I've been riding it 3-4 days a week, mostly during rush hours.

 

 

Really? Crush loaded? Meaning that the entire interior space was absolutely full and there was no room for a single additional person anywhere inside? Or do you only mean that there was a tight clump of people by the doors blocking access to the middle of the car? That happens on every line.

 

G trains are definitely more crowded than they used to be, but they're not particularly crowded in comparison with other lines or (more importantly) with the loading guidelines, which formally define when additional service is warranted.

 

 

Of course not. Loading guidelines are based on average loads, not on individual trains.

I hope you realize that "loading guidelines" are total BS. These are more of the (MTA)'s tactics to not give us the service we deserve. I'm extremely surprised you haven't seen the things I see, you have to be riding a different line... that train was completely full, with VERY LITTLE space. It was impossible to get people in at each stop.

 

Do you seriously think that the is the same line as it was 4 years ago? smh

[Guest MTA Bus]

The needs help. I live on that line and believe me, ridership on that line has gone up. They should either give the 600' trains or more TPH.

[Brooklyn]

I do think the could use a couple more TPH during rush hours.

 

I don't think 8 cars are needed.

 

I am not saying this as someone who doesn't know the line....I have ridden it for over 20 years, hardcore for 5-6.

 

4 cars are actually enough the vast majority of the time. But to be honest, I wouldn't mind the line going back to 6 cars.

 

Rush hours can sometimes get a little bad. Also when the Tech kids are let out (Fulton st).

 

I would increase the headways during rush hours and afterschool for the tech kids.

 

The evening rush headways need to be improved. For whatever reason, the seems to run quicker in the morning than the evening. A cursory look at the schedule backs this up. It seems Court Sq bound trains (in the evening) are running 5-6 TPH.....that DEFINITELY needs to be increased. Sometimes you have to wait 12 minutes for the next train to come.

 

That needs to change---they should be coming every 6-7 mins during the evening rush (9-10 TPH).

 

The MTA might want to consider short-turning trains at bedford nostrand--like a shuttle.

[Quill Depot]

A little more in TPH seems fine. About the Bedford-Nostrand idea, there is no transfer there. 

[Grand Concourse]

No, but it is a 3 track station, so which ever part of the line north/south needs the extra service, it'd be helpful.

[Quill Depot]

These riders should be hoping Smith-9th opens earlier. Run the same amount of trains and turning them at Smith-9th makes there be more TPH.

[Grand Concourse]

There's no need to turn them at Smith 9th because people want to get to 4th av for the transfer. At that point you may as well keep the G going all the way to Church av.

[realizm]

No, but it is a 3 track station, so which ever part of the line north/south needs the extra service, it'd be helpful.

 

Totally agree, that's what I stated in a previous post concerning Bedford-Nostrand. 

[AndrewJC]

I hope you realize that "loading guidelines" are total BS. These are more of the (MTA)'s tactics to not give us the service we deserve.

 

Loading guidelines (often called loading standards) are actually used by most major transit agencies. It's really the only way to ensure that operating funds are used equitably - without them, a very crowded line could easily end up with less service than a less crowded line, if the riders on the second line complain louder.

 

http://books.google.com/books?id=NbYqQSQcE2MC&lpg=PA51&ots=majC-oGu1-&pg=PA51#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp100/part%205.pdf (Chapter 4)

 

I'm extremely surprised you haven't seen the things I see, you have to be riding a different line...that train was completely full, with VERY LITTLE space. It was impossible to get people in at each stop.

 

That's often the case on other lines, since people crowd by the doors. Still doesn't make them truly crush loaded.

 

Do you seriously think that the is the same line as it was 4 years ago? smh

 

As I said: "G trains are definitely more crowded than they used to be, but they're not particularly crowded in comparison with other lines or (more importantly) with the loading guidelines, which formally define when additional service is warranted."

[Art Vandelay]

The IND's (well, Mayor Hylan's) refusal to coordinate with the IRT/BMT has had negative consequences when it comes to transfer hubs - look at QBP, Queens Plaza and 21st St-Queensbridge, or the lack of any IND connection to Atlantic Terminal. Times Square seems to be the only exception, but at the very least Atlantic should not have been an oversight.

The Times square transfer was built into the station when new, however, it was outside of fare control until the 1980s rebuild IINM. The IND built many such passages. 

[LLQBTT]

Loading guidelines (often called loading standards) are actually used by most major transit agencies. It's really the only way to ensure that operating funds are used equitably - without them, a very crowded line could easily end up with less service than a less crowded line, if the riders on the second line complain louder.

 

http://books.google.com/books?id=NbYqQSQcE2MC&lpg=PA51&ots=majC-oGu1-&pg=PA51#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp100/part%205.pdf (Chapter 4)

 

 

That's often the case on other lines, since people crowd by the doors. Still doesn't make them truly crush loaded.

 

 

As I said: "G trains are definitely more crowded than they used to be, but they're not particularly crowded in comparison with other lines or (more importantly) with the loading guidelines, which formally define when additional service is warranted."

 

The n/b G during is crowded to the point where some people at Nassau and definitely Greenpoint cannot board in the first or last car and must wait for the next G.  This is prevalant where the headways are greater in the morning rush.  There are 9 and 8 minute headways bewteen some Gs whilst there are 5 and 6 minute headways with others.  The difference doesn't seem great, but % wise, a 9 minute headway is 50% greater than a 6 minute one.  And this gets amplified because often times the G arriving 9 minutes after its leader gets slowed down further and is jammed whilst the G 5 or 6 minutes behind, often ends up at Court Sq 2 or 3 minutes after its leader. 

[itmaybeokay]

The n/b G during is crowded to the point where some people at Nassau and definitely Greenpoint cannot board in the first or last car and must wait for the next G.  This is prevalant where the headways are greater in the morning rush.  There are 9 and 8 minute headways bewteen some Gs whilst there are 5 and 6 minute headways with others.  The difference doesn't seem great, but % wise, a 9 minute headway is 50% greater than a 6 minute one.  And this gets amplified because often times the G arriving 9 minutes after its leader gets slowed down further and is jammed whilst the G 5 or 6 minutes behind, often ends up at Court Sq 2 or 3 minutes after its leader. 

 

Yes, there are issues inherent with the staccato headways on the , however this is required by it's sharing trackage with the . You can't really add more trains during the rush without interfering with the F, and overwhelmingly, the F wins, it needs all the trains it can get. F riders, at stations where the G also runs, probably curse the crosstown line in the AM as they try to get to manhattan. 

 

If there were connections from the Express tracks at Bergen to the Crosstown line at Hoyt-Schermerhorn, then they could do some put-ins there, and short runs that wouldn't interfere with the F, but that not existing, all they can do is add trains between bedford and court sq, which would help some but not all. Might be worthwhile though. 

[6 Lexington Ave]

I do believe that this is a sign that the   is considering doing something that will help the line:

http://www.ny1.com/content/transit/177555/mta-to-conduct-full-line-review-of-g-train

[Minato ku]

Complaints include overcrowding, long waits, no free above-ground transfers and a lack of communication about service changes or disruptions.

http://www.ny1.com/content/transit/177555/mta-to-conduct-full-line-review-of-g-train

I had never noticed it but it is true that the G train while it passes close to numerous lines, lacks of interchange with some of those lines.

Something I hate is the interchange by using the streets.

[Brooklyn]

itmaybeokay, on 21 Feb 2013 - 11:13, said:

Yes, there are issues inherent with the staccato headways on the , however this is required by it's sharing trackage with the . You can't really add more trains during the rush without interfering with the F, and overwhelmingly, the F wins, it needs all the trains it can get. F riders, at stations where the G also runs, probably curse the crosstown line in the AM as they try to get to manhattan.

 

If there were connections from the Express tracks at Bergen to the Crosstown line at Hoyt-Schermerhorn, then they could do some put-ins there, and short runs that wouldn't interfere with the F, but that not existing, all they can do is add trains between bedford and court sq, which would help some but not all. Might be worthwhile though.

I don't think so.

Again, during evening rush hours, the line is running at

5TPH--look at the schedule, particularly at 5pm. Even I didn't

realize it was that bad.

 

I think Culver can handle 3 or 4 TPH extra for the .

After all, I have been using this train for 20 years. There were more

TPH even 5 years ago. I don't see what has happened so that the TPH

can't go back to its previous levels--this was when the line was

terminating at Smith-9th sts....Church Av is a way more capable

terminal.

But you do bring up a good point--there should be a crossover to

short turn trains at Hoyt-Schermerhorn. That should actually be a

priority for the line.

Now that I think about it, maybe there should be a tunnel built to

connect to Atlantic Terminal. I was previously against it, but I have

changed my mind.

A theoretical tunnel can be built connecting to the side of

the station. It can lead to Lafayette Av. That distance actually

isn't that bad and would be shorter than building the tunnel straight

to where the LIRR is--people who know the area know what I am talking

about. The Brighton line it is actually north of it. Passengers would

have to go through the platform to access the rest of the

complex.

This setup would be like Canal St along the BMT and IRT.

This could work.

[Bill from Maspeth]

The n/b G during is crowded to the point where some people at Nassau and definitely Greenpoint cannot board in the first or last car and must wait for the next G.  This is prevalant where the headways are greater in the morning rush.  There are 9 and 8 minute headways bewteen some Gs whilst there are 5 and 6 minute headways with others.  The difference doesn't seem great, but % wise, a 9 minute headway is 50% greater than a 6 minute one.  And this gets amplified because often times the G arriving 9 minutes after its leader gets slowed down further and is jammed whilst the G 5 or 6 minutes behind, often ends up at Court Sq 2 or 3 minutes after its leader. 

 

Gee whiz.  If some people can't get on the first or last cars, why can't they move to one of the middle cars so they won't have to wait for the next train?

[bobtehpanda]

I don't think so.

Again, during evening rush hours, the line is running at

5TPH--look at the schedule, particularly at 5pm. Even I didn't

realize it was that bad.

 

I think Culver can handle 3 or 4 TPH extra for the .

After all, I have been using this train for 20 years. There were more

TPH even 5 years ago. I don't see what has happened so that the TPH

can't go back to its previous levels--this was when the line was

terminating at Smith-9th sts....Church Av is a way more capable

terminal.

But you do bring up a good point--there should be a crossover to

short turn trains at Hoyt-Schermerhorn. That should actually be a

priority for the line.

Now that I think about it, maybe there should be a tunnel built to

connect to Atlantic Terminal. I was previously against it, but I have

changed my mind.

A theoretical tunnel can be built connecting to the side of

the station. It can lead to Lafayette Av. That distance actually

isn't that bad and would be shorter than building the tunnel straight

to where the LIRR is--people who know the area know what I am talking

about. The Brighton line it is actually north of it. Passengers would

have to go through the platform to access the rest of the

complex.

This setup would be like Canal St along the BMT and IRT.

This could work.

 

According to this map, Fulton is only a block down Fort Green Pl and a bit down Hanson Pl from Atlantic Terminal, and Lafayette on the is only a bit further. A transfer is certainly within the realm of possibility. That being said, no one should ever, ever create a maze like the one at Canal - it's so bad that most Chinatown regulars take the to Grand instead.

 

It'd be nice if the MTA would upload its neighborhood maps (which aren't even all that accurate), but then I'd guess that that they wouldn't be able to sell them at the Transit store.

[Brooklyn]

According to this map, Fulton is only a block down Fort Green Pl and a bit down Hanson Pl from Atlantic Terminal, and Lafayette on the is only a bit further. A transfer is certainly within the realm of possibility. That being said, no one should ever, ever create a maze like the one at Canal - it's so bad that most Chinatown regulars take the to Grand instead.

 

It'd be nice if the MTA would upload its neighborhood maps (which aren't even all that accurate), but then I'd guess that that they wouldn't be able to sell them at the Transit store.

 

A "bit" would still present engineering challenges.

 

I am glad you showed that map...my point was that the western edge of the station and the Northern edge of the station provide the closest distance. I don't know how familiar you are with the area, but there is an entrance for the at the side of the old Williamsburg Savings bank.

 

I don't want a maze like Canal--but I am saying that the tunnel (for the shortest distance) can end at the ----passengers who want other trains would simply go through that platform and up the stairs.

[Culver]

A "bit" would still present engineering challenges.

 

I am glad you showed that map...my point was that the western edge of the station and the Northern edge of the station provide the closest distance. I don't know how familiar you are with the area, but there is an entrance for the at the side of the old Williamsburg Savings bank.

 

I don't want a maze like Canal--but I am saying that the tunnel (for the shortest distance) can end at the ----passengers who want other trains would simply go through that platform and up the stairs.

I'd like to see that done. St. Felix St isn't heavily used (or at least it wasn't back in my high school days, maybe now it's different) and can be dug up with minimal complaints. One side is residential and the other is taken up mostly by a few larger buildings. The connection on the side would be under a locked-up park that has rat problems anyways. Point is, not heavy traffic. I've still been in the area a few times on weekends and have made the walk from Atlantic center via St. Felix St to get to the and then my home Culver line; still no signs of life on the street.

 

Another alternative is a (relatively simple) straight-through mezzanine connection between Hoyt-Schermerhorn and Hoyt Street with a two-block passageway under Hoyt.