4 jerome express?

[pelhamfrank dyre av]

i've been wondering why the mta has'nt  have the  run express in the bronx,and i know the mta did a pilot program on that

[Vistausss]

Because it didn't solve the overcrowding problem.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

The does run express in the Bronx...

 

Only in the reverse peak direction from 149 street to Burnside Avenue

[RollOver]

To the OP:

 

It was a failure. They ended up nearly empty while the locals were severely overcrowded. Hardly any of the Bronx areas the serves wanted a faster ride to and from the populated areas in the city. Current service in the Bronx on the line is fine as it is.

[paulrivera]

The first pilot program sucked (stop at Mosholu, Burnside, 149, 125) because it skipped way too many important stations and didnt help anyone, and the 15 minute headway was not conducive for Burnside connections, so anyone who got on at Bedford Park and Fordham in particular would stay packed on the local.

 

The second pilot program was a bit better, express service was every 20 minutes, stopped at Mosholu and Bedford Park before heading down the middle, left two minutes before the local and made connections to that local at Burnside for the Kingsbridge thru 183rd riders (matched the 4-5 minute headway). It kinda helped the 176 and Mt Eden riders with more seats (if your timing was right), but didnt help anyone past that point.

[MTA Bus]

I think because most of the train riders get off at the stops that a Jerome Express would skip. With the Burnside Av trains, there's always one to Woodlawn right behind it, so it's not a big deal.

[AndrewJC]

The first pilot program sucked (stop at Mosholu, Burnside, 149, 125) because it skipped way too many important stations and didnt help anyone, and the 15 minute headway was not conducive for Burnside connections, so anyone who got on at Bedford Park and Fordham in particular would stay packed on the local.

 

The second pilot program was a bit better, express service was every 20 minutes, stopped at Mosholu and Bedford Park before heading down the middle, left two minutes before the local and made connections to that local at Burnside for the Kingsbridge thru 183rd riders (matched the 4-5 minute headway). It kinda helped the 176 and Mt Eden riders with more seats (if your timing was right), but didnt help anyone past that point.

 

Both pilots were failures. If you take the same number of trains and the same number of riders, and you juggle service so that some trains are less crowded than average, the result is that other trains are more crowded than average.

 

What happens when those more-crowded-than-average trains reach 149th or 125th or 86th, where nobody cares whether it ran express along Jerome? Dwell time shoots up as everybody crams on. The train falls further and further behind schedule and delays the trains behind it.

 

On a busy, crowded, frequent line, the best service is the most consistent service. All this express did was make the loads wildly inconsistent.

[Broadway Local]

I think because most of the train riders get off at the stops that a Jerome Express would skip. With the Burnside Av trains, there's always one to Woodlawn right behind it, so it's not a big deal.

 

Yup and this is why the locals get packed.

 

You've got 161st St-Yankee Stadium, Fordham Rd and Kingsbridge Rd that are mostly used local stations. I don't even know why these stations are designed to be local stations anyway. lol

[Vistausss]

@iStopRequest: Because the IRT never expected for their lines to become this crowded so they never designed their lines for additional true express service.

[realizm]

To add, the IRT's Jerome Ave line's 161 Street Station was built in 1917. The former Yankee stadium was not built until 1923. The Dual Contracts architects never anticipated this.

 

The IND station was built in 1933. The reason they built the station as a local one was because they wanted to prevent overcrowding during games by isolating the trains transporting game crowds from the trains that carried regular commuters during the PM rush specifically. This was why they dropped the idea to make that station, a full stop station with two island platforms.which I think was not exactly a good idea to begin with, but as the saying goes, hindsight is 20/20. There are layup tracks built immediately north of 167th Street station on the IND Grand Concourse with the main purpose in mind of layups and fast turnarounds for baseball specials which was the original IND layout albeit with changes over the years on the switches. If one notices, on the S/B side the benchwall becomes a wider alignment for a fouth track.

[Vistausss]

Even so: I wonder how it'll look today if they originally implemented express service. According to everyone, people use so many local stations that any express will fail (which is why the express pilot failed). If express service was set up from the beginning, I'd think they'd slash it over the years (just like the Culver express) because they'd see that most people use local stations anyway.

[RTOPRO]

The does run express in the Bronx...

 

Only in the reverse peak direction from 149 street to Burnside Avenue

Just because it runs up the middle does not make it express service. You stated exactly why it's not express. "Reverse peak."

 

To start off some 4 trains run up M track but not from 149th. They change from 4 to M after 167th Street and continue on M track up to Burnside where the train terminates and is then taken to the yard. So you may ask why not just send a train local up to Burnside Avenue and remove it from service there? For the same reason why there aren't that many trains that actually terminate at Bedford Park even though it's started so on the clocks. Taking a train out of service on thru tracks holds up continuing service as it takes time to verify all passengers have de-trained. As in the Bedford Park situation it has the potential of holding up continuing northbound and southbound service.

 

Also if there was a 4 to M switch just south of Burnside then yes trains would run local all the way to Burnside. In some cases some trains are sent local to Burnside and terminate on 4 but only if the headway window is large enough to handle it without a delay.

 

So to sum it all up the Burnside terminating trains run from 167th to Burnside on M where removed from service so that slowing down of service after rush hours can be done in an orderly fashion without delaying other continuing service using the only available 4 to M switch to exist south of Burnside (at 167).

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

Just because it runs up the middle does not make it express service. You stated exactly why it's not express. "Reverse peak."

 

To start off some 4 trains run up M track but not from 149th. They change from 4 to M after 167th Street and continue on M track up to Burnside where the train terminates and is then taken to the yard. So you may ask why not just send a train local up to Burnside Avenue and remove it from service there? For the same reason why there aren't that many trains that actually terminate at Bedford Park even though it's started so on the clocks. Taking a train out of service on thru tracks holds up continuing service as it takes time to verify all passengers have de-trained. As in the Bedford Park situation it has the potential of holding up continuing northbound and southbound service.

 

Also if there was a 4 to M switch just south of Burnside then yes trains would run local all the way to Burnside. In some cases some trains are sent local to Burnside and terminate on 4 but only if the headway window is large enough to handle it without a delay.

 

So to sum it all up the Burnside terminating trains run from 167th to Burnside on M where removed from service so that slowing down of service after rush hours can be done in an orderly fashion without delaying other continuing service using the only available 4 to M switch to exist south of Burnside (at 167).

 

So technically, the last stop for those 's is 167th street, in a way?

[RTOPRO]

No the last stop is Burnside. There's no technically when it comes to an in service subway train and it's last stop.

[AndrewJC]

To add, the IRT's Jerome Ave line's 161 Street Station was built in 1917. The former Yankee stadium was not built until 1923. The Dual Contracts architects never anticipated this.

 

The IND station was built in 1933. The reason they built the station as a local one was because they wanted to prevent overcrowding during games by isolating the trains transporting game crowds from the trains that carried regular commuters during the PM rush specifically. This was why they dropped the idea to make that station, a full stop station with two island platforms.which I think was not exactly a good idea to begin with, but as the saying goes, hindsight is 20/20. There are layup tracks built immediately north of 167th Street station on the IND Grand Concourse with the main purpose in mind of layups and fast turnarounds for baseball specials which was the original IND layout albeit with changes over the years on the switches. If one notices, on the S/B side the benchwall becomes a wider alignment for a fouth track.

 

I think it's simpler than that.

 

The express serves primarily a rush hour, commuter market. 161st isn't a major origin station in the AM rush, nor is it a major destination station in the PM rush except on game days. So why would it be an express station? (It is somewhat of a destination in the AM rush and an origin in the PM rush, but many commuters who work in the area are coming from Manhattan, and they get a double complement of local service.)

[Vistausss]

Not too mention the fact that some people who work in the area of Yankees take MNRR from Yankees-E153rd so that makes the 161st station of even less importance (at least for express service).

[SubwayGuy]

I think it's simpler than that.

 

The express serves primarily a rush hour, commuter market. 161st isn't a major origin station in the AM rush, nor is it a major destination station in the PM rush except on game days. So why would it be an express station? (It is somewhat of a destination in the AM rush and an origin in the PM rush, but many commuters who work in the area are coming from Manhattan, and they get a double complement of local service.)

 

Not true. The transfer to/from the IND is very important and frequently used. 161 has sufficient ridership to justify not skipping the station year round, regardless of whether or not there's a game.

Just because it runs up the middle does not make it express service. You stated exactly why it's not express. "Reverse peak."

 

To start off some 4 trains run up M track but not from 149th. They change from 4 to M after 167th Street and continue on M track up to Burnside where the train terminates and is then taken to the yard. So you may ask why not just send a train local up to Burnside Avenue and remove it from service there? For the same reason why there aren't that many trains that actually terminate at Bedford Park even though it's started so on the clocks. Taking a train out of service on thru tracks holds up continuing service as it takes time to verify all passengers have de-trained. As in the Bedford Park situation it has the potential of holding up continuing northbound and southbound service.

 

Also if there was a 4 to M switch just south of Burnside then yes trains would run local all the way to Burnside. In some cases some trains are sent local to Burnside and terminate on 4 but only if the headway window is large enough to handle it without a delay.

 

So to sum it all up the Burnside terminating trains run from 167th to Burnside on M where removed from service so that slowing down of service after rush hours can be done in an orderly fashion without delaying other continuing service using the only available 4 to M switch to exist south of Burnside (at 167).

 

The other reason is that allows layups to come from two directions to go into Mosholu Yard. After the AM rush this is especially important, and the moves don't necessarily conflict. A Woodlawn layup can go into the spur north of Bedford Park, change ends, and enter the yard. A Burnside layup on M track has a straight shot into the yard.

 

If all the layups came from Woodlawn, a slight delay resulting in a flurry of layups would cause chaos, as it can at Van Cortlandt from time to time, which is why VC will double end certain layups or send one long to 231 middle - to get more trains in the yard quickly and keep pockets open at the terminal for arriving trains.

[Vistausss]

@SubwayGuy: According to the , 161 St gets only about 3 million passengers per year excluding Yankees games. MNRR gets 1.2 million passengers per year from Yankees-E153rd excluding Yankees games. So 161 St is not that popular outside of Yankees games. Sure, it's popular enough to justify year-round local service but express service wouldn't justify.

[paulrivera]

Just because it runs up the middle does not make it express service. You stated exactly why it's not express. "Reverse peak."

And after about 6pm until almost 9pm. Towards the end of the Burnside lay-ups in the evening the service gaps north of Burnside become quite unreasonable even on a good day.

[AndrewJC]

Not true. The transfer to/from the IND is very important and frequently used. 161 has sufficient ridership to justify not skipping the station year round, regardless of whether or not there's a game.

 

There are plenty of transfer points, some much busier than this one, that happen to be situated at local stations.

[N6 Limited]

Since the Jerome line is elevated, can't they transform stations into express stations?

[Jsunflyguy]

There are plenty of transfer points, some much busier than this one, that happen to be situated at local stations.

Franklin ave on the is a perfect example, the will usually arrive 4-5 minutes before an Eastbound and everyone will arrive in time to crowd the first two cars usually leading to crush loads on at least the first 4 cars during the after school rush. I'd often run to the back of the train to avoid that crap, behind the conductor the situation is usually tolerable. Of course all these people are going to B'way Jct.

[bobtehpanda]

There are plenty of transfer points, some much busier than this one, that happen to be situated at local stations.

 

74th-Roosevelt comes to mind; should anything go wrong with the , that station will practically be unsafe with the amount of crowding going on.

 

Since the Jerome line is elevated, can't they transform stations into express stations?

 

1. It would be very very disruptive for a very long time, because you'd be physically taking apart a station while trying to maintain some semblance of service (hopefully). Think Culver Viaduct disruptive.

 

2. For obvious reasons, express stations are wider than local stations, so you'd need to enlarge the structure and strengthen it (not to mention, build it closer to windows and buildings which may not be able to handle increased vibrations, or may not be willing to be so near a station)

[RollOver]

Franklin ave on the is a perfect example, the will usually arrive 4-5 minutes before an Eastbound and everyone will arrive in time to crowd the first two cars usually leading to crush loads on at least the first 4 cars during the after school rush. I'd often run to the back of the train to avoid that crap, behind the conductor the situation is usually tolerable. Of course all these people are going to B'way Jct.

 

Few of them also get off at Rockaway/Fulton. But when an is across the platform, those B'way Jct goers jump onto it like crazy. The express run on that section only saves you two minutes or three (cuz of the timers before the junction). It's roughly the same as on the local.

[Vistausss]

@bob: And even if they do choose to transform stations into express stations, what will the service pattern be? Lots of stations along the line are so well used that it'd be hard to skip stations.