News Coalition urging MTA to restore “express” F train service

[Wallyhorse]

Bring back the have it run on a 10 minute headway like the and have it run between 168-Church ave, making all local stops, but I doubt it would happen but they can find a way

As I said before on this:

 

becomes the Culver Express, going via the after West 4th and running via Culver Express to Coney Island, except overnights.

 

Biggest benefit is it gives riders at Coney Island, express stops between Church Avenue and Jay Street (including Bergen Street if the lower level were to be rehabbed to reopen), York Street, East Broadway, Essex-Delancey and Broadway-Lafayette a new one-seat option via 8th Avenue they don't currently have PLUS also gives riders on the a new transfer to the 8th Avenue Line at Bleecker.  Next biggest benefit is it gives riders on the Fulton the option to switch to the at Jay Street if they are going to midtown and bypass lower Manhattan by doing so.

 

Biggest con is it does mean the and all stop on the local track at Broadway-Lafayette, but we are only talking about the one station and if at peak periods it's 30-32 TPH that can be manageable.

 

replaces the as the Fulton Local at all times to Euclid Avenue and late nights is extended to Lefferts Boulevard to eliminate the late-night Lefferts Shuttle.  Rush hours, some trains (including those AM from and PM to 179th Street) terminate at Chambers Street as the does now.

 

The would join the in terminating at Church Avenue, except overnights when the would run as it does now.

 

The train (or the old (AA) train that some remember) is brought back as a supplemental train between Chambers and 168th Street.  This would only be 2-4 TPH, with 15-minute intervals at the shortest even in peak periods since its only meant for people at Chambers, Canal or Spring Street who want a one-seat ride to the UWS or are too lazy to walk over to the north platform (and those north of Spring looking for that or the ).

 

This to me would be the way to do it.

[RollOver]

You just don't know when to stop trolling, don't you Wallyhorse?

[Wallyhorse]

You just don't know when to stop trolling, don't you Wallyhorse?

This to me is still the best way to handle it if the pols and others insist on there being a Culver Express.  It can be a case of "be careful what you wish for," however.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

If the was extended to Church (if it existed), it would've allow for a bi-directional Culver Express on that portion (and would've saved CI Bound 's some time as well).

As I said before on this:

becomes the Culver Express, going via the after West 4th and running via Culver Express to Coney Island, except overnights.

Biggest benefit is it gives riders at Coney Island, express stops between Church Avenue and Jay Street (including Bergen Street if the lower level were to be rehabbed to reopen), York Street, East Broadway, Essex-Delancey and Broadway-Lafayette a new one-seat option via 8th Avenue they don't currently have PLUS also gives riders on the a new transfer to the 8th Avenue Line at Bleecker.  Next biggest benefit is it gives riders on the Fulton the option to switch to the at Jay Street if they are going to midtown and bypass lower Manhattan by doing so.

Biggest con is it does mean the and all stop on the local track at Broadway-Lafayette, but we are only talking about the one station and if at peak periods it's 30-32 TPH that can be manageable.

replaces the as the Fulton Local at all times to Euclid Avenue and late nights is extended to Lefferts Boulevard to eliminate the late-night Lefferts Shuttle.  Rush hours, some trains (including those AM from and PM to 179th Street) terminate at Chambers Street as the does now.

The would join the in terminating at Church Avenue, except overnights when the would run as it does now.

The train (or the old (AA) train that some remember) is brought back as a supplemental train between Chambers and 168th Street.  This would only be 2-4 TPH, with 15-minute intervals at the shortest even in peak periods since its only meant for people at Chambers, Canal or Spring Street who want a one-seat ride to the UWS or are too lazy to walk over to the north platform (and those north of Spring looking for that or the ).

This to me would be the way to do it.

So all this for a Culver Express...

[T to Dyre Avenue]

The only way this will be possible is if we had a supplemental 6th Avenue local service. We dont have that supplemental 6th Ave local service because of the doomsday cuts in 2010. Because the option of sending the V to Brooklyn was killed. We cant phase out the M now, the demand for it is too high. Amazing that the politicians here do not realize that. They are asking to draw blood from stones.

 

Additionally we simply do not have enough cars to even do this right now. More, the 6th Avenue Line cannot handle 5 services at once even if say the MTA requested more R179 cars with an option 2 as originally planned. They are asking for a miracle out of the clear blue sky.

 

 

I certainly agree that an express is not an option now. We don't have enough cars and we won't even when the R179s come online, because only 40 of those 300 cars can operate in 10-car trains and those are meant to give Transit enough 5-car sets to accommodate the expanded to 96th & 2nd and nothing more, while the rest will operate only on lines that use 8-car trains.

 

But why can't the 6th Ave line operate five services at one time? Why can't it run three services on the local tracks? For 13 years, the , and ( Q ) trains ran on the express tracks. And the Broadway BMT line ran five services for many more years including 2001-04, 1986-88 and pre-Chrystie St Connection (pre-October 1967).

 

For the sake of argument and to minimize any potential confusion, let's say the local would terminate at Church Av while the express would continue to Coney Island.

 

With that out of the way, there are several problems with the F (Culver) express proposals that keep popping up. First and foremost, most proposal lack a suitable northern terminal. Now, if express service is achieved through a circle F/diamond F procedure, this wouldn't necessarily apply as both locals and express would come out of Jamaica-179 St. However, unless there is additional service added on the Queens end, which is impossible due to capacity constraints on Queens Blvd, service south of Church Av would be cut significantly. As it stands, the F currently runs 12-15 trains per hour between Kings Hwy and 179 St, so any efficient express/local setup would require effectively halving service south of Church Av. That means those potential express trains would be running every 8-10 minutes instead of the current 4-6 minutes wait between local F trains. I doubt Culver riders will put up with less service (and potentially even more crowded trains) to skip seven stops, so that option is out.

 

...

 

With that option out, it usually comes to creating a new line that runs down Culver. That's where my earlier remark about lacking a northern terminal comes in. Queens is out for the capacity reason I mentioned before. Having another line run down Central Park West isn't happening because, while there's some space for another line, it would be terribly excessive and wasteful. And we can't have a terminal for this new line while the station is a through station for another line, so a station like 57 St/6 Av is out. While it works for the M during those weekends service is extended to Midtown, it would not work with the tight rush-hour headways of the F. That's why the recent proposal in the thread of the same name has the new line terminating at 96 St/2 Av. Even then, that adds an excessive amount of service on 6th Avenue with the F, M and the new line.

 

That's why we won't see a Culver express any time soon.

I guess 28 tph between the , and 2nd Ave Subway could be excessive. It may very well be more than what the 6th Ave local stations need

 

Hmmm, that is an interesting point. If Culver Line riders react negatively to having their waits increased from a local 4-6 minutes to 8-10 minutes with a Church-to-Jay express, then there goes the theory that they want an express.

 

I think the MTA, or someone on their behalf should put the choice out there, both to the riders and Brooklyn politicians, because it is a choice. Either keep the current local service on its present headways or run a less-frequent running service that runs express between Church and Jay. Then we can find out what they really want. They can't have it both ways. Can't have local and express service between Church and Jay, both running 15 tph. And show then exactly why that can't be done.

[CenSin]

This to me is still the best way to handle it if the pols and others insist on there being a Culver Express.  It can be a case of "be careful what you wish for," however.

Did you read all the replies explaining why it is not the best way?

 

Since you've posted the same thing everywhere, you might have to go through multiple threads to find those replies.

[YankeesPwnMets]

The via Culver would definitely alleviate overcrowding from Park Slope but I don't think the antiquated signal system can handle the at peak hours.

[Quill Depot]

So basically because that one stop is heavily used, everyone else further south shouldn't have express service? Don't be ridiculous. The overcrowding conditions need to be dealt with and arguing that one station has so much ridership isn't the answer. They need to find a way to split service up so that people further up can get on, and people further South are crammed and stuck with slower service.

Finally someone with a good reasoning ability! One crowded stop doesn't justify no express service. 33rd St on the is pretty crowded and so is 51st. Nobody is gonna argue there. South Brooklyn riders deserve a non-jam packed ride to at least downtown. It's possible and it can happen!

You just don't know when to stop trolling, don't you Wallyhorse?

Sorry if I missed it, but where's the trolling. His proposals might not have the slightest bit of reason, but they aren't trolling.

[bstar1]

F that start and terminate at Kings Hwy could be Diamond AM only & PM only peak Exp Rush hour only, while F to and from Coney Island would be Circle Local

[CenSin]

F that start and terminate at Kings Hwy could be Diamond AM only & PM only peak Exp Rush hour only, while F to and from Coney Island would be Circle Local

Bullcrap. The people who would most benefit from an express get a local? Who does the express serve by skipping 4 stations right off the bat, and especially at a station that is 5 stations closer to Manhattan? I can understand why the MTA does this crap with the and the on the Brighton Line, but the doesn't have such a huge impediment to a -like arrangement.

[Wallyhorse]

Did you read all the replies explaining why it is not the best way?

 

Since you've posted the same thing everywhere, you might have to go through multiple threads to find those replies.

Like I said in a subsequent post, it also could be a case of "be careful what you wish for" as well.

[mediccjh]

The poor dead horse has been beaten enough already....

[T to Dyre Avenue]

For the sake of argument and to minimize any potential confusion, let's say the local would terminate at Church Av while the express would continue to Coney Island.

 

...

 

As it stands, the F currently runs 12-15 trains per hour between Kings Hwy and 179 St, so any efficient express/local setup would require effectively halving service south of Church Av. That means those potential express trains would be running every 8-10 minutes instead of the current 4-6 minutes wait between local F trains. I doubt Culver riders will put up with less service (and potentially even more crowded trains) to skip seven stops, so that option is out.

...

 

That's why we won't see a Culver express any time soon.

I decided to have a look at the MTA's station ridership numbers. Honestly, I was kind of surprised at what I saw. The ridership figures for the line stations south of Church are relatively low and they get pretty frequent service compared to the nearby ,  , and lines - especially the Culver el stations from Kings Highway on up. Maybe the Brooklyn politicians who signed that letter should be focusing on how to run more trains on the other lines. I mean it's kind of unfair that Kings Highway to Ditmas Ave get 12-15 trains per hour, while busier  line stations like Bay Pkwy, 18th Ave and 79th St have to make due with just 10 tph. And most West End Line stations saw increased ridership from 2012 to 2013. Maybe the West End Line is the south Brooklyn line the pols should be focusing. After all, it had more frequent rush hour service before June 2010, when there was the and the < M > (although I am not advocating a return of the old M service, given how popular the current is).

 

So basically because that one stop is heavily used, everyone else further south shouldn't have express service? Don't be ridiculous.  The overcrowding conditions need to be dealt with and arguing that one station has so much ridership isn't the answer.  They need to find a way to split service up so that people further up can get on, and people further South are crammed and stuck with slower service.

The crowding is north of Church Ave. That's where the focus has to be. Stops south of Church get more service than the surrounding lines (except maybe south of Kings Highway) and have lower ridership, so I can't imagine there is overcrowding on the between Coney Island and Church Ave. Perhaps the solution is to short-turn some rush-hour trains at Church Ave instead of Avenue X or Kings Hwy, and forget about express service between Church and Jay.

[RollOver]

"Let's skip the most heavily used stations on the Culver Line and save one or two minutes, because that would be the best transportation improvement in all of Brooklyn!" /s

 

 

Looking at the data, the express makes about as much sense as the Jerome Av Express.

 

I'm not even going to bother arguing/debating with the little boy anymore. I'll just ignore and walk away like most beefs end by doing just that.

 

Don't care.

[MTA Dude]

The crowding is north of Church Ave. That's where the focus has to be. Stops south of Church get more service than the surrounding lines (except maybe south of Kings Highway) and have lower ridership, so I can't imagine there is overcrowding on the between Coney Island and Church Ave. Perhaps the solution is to short-turn some rush-hour trains at Church Ave instead of Avenue X or Kings Hwy, and forget about express service between Church and Jay.

 

No way. The point of this is to get express service on the Culver Line, and we are gonna keep trying.

 

I think the best option to get local to run to Church Avenue (don't know where the will go but whatever), then have the express run to Church, then local to Coney Island.

The via Culver would definitely alleviate overcrowding from Park Slope but I don't think the antiquated signal system can handle the at peak hours.

 

If it can handle 2 minute intervals then it will work. But then it wouldn't look good.

[realizm]

f**k the unenthusiam man, look some riders are taking a stand. Surprised they even know express is even possible, but I think it's good.

 

They will not make a stand at the expense of bringing up operation costs and making it harder for me to get from point A to B as we have an obvious limit on cars. The MTA just reduced a 7.5% fare hike sceduled for 2015. Im totally opposed to the idea and this is the reason bottom line. Indeed I REFUSE to carry the financial burden for a few special interest groups. They can all shove it!

 

For a few stupid stops that only takes like 3 minutes off their commute, you got to be kidding me...

[46Dover]

The express would've been a reason to keep the around (at least rush hours), and have the back to Nassau. It would at least look that way on my fantasy map. But as Realizm said, there wouldn't be enough cars to cover such service, especially with the R179

[bobtehpanda]

I, personally, think that the is way more important than bringing back the , since as another poster mentioned there are Brooklyn stations in the same general area with more riders but significantly less service than stations.

[RollOver]

They're not going to restore the and revert the back to its old route just so you guys can get your Culver Express. The new is what it is for a reason. Take it or leave it.

[realizm]

Just as a reminder from post #17: The MTA was considering extending the V to Brooklyn. In the MTA study I sourced, they saw that extending the V to Church Avenue will elimiate the bottleneck at 2nd Avenue since switches must be used to get into the inside pockets for temination and then turnaround which delays service from Brooklyn.

 

However the doomsday cuts came and the V was phased out as a result. The M was rerouted of course and then passenger demand grew. Therefore in the light of recent current events at this point of time if ever, it would not be a good idea to reroute the M again for the sake of F express service.

[realizm]

This is the actual letter sent to the MTA Executive Committee:

http://www.amny.com/transit/outerboro-transit-dreams-a-wishlist-of-service-improvements-1.9311988

 

======================================================================================

 

LETTER:

September 12, 2014
Thomas F. Prendergast
Chairman & Chief Executive Officer
Metropolitan Transportation Authority
2 Broadway New York, NY 10004

Dear Chairman Prendergast:

As elected officials representing the hundreds of thousands of Brooklyn residents who use the F train millions of times each year, we urge you to restore express service to the Brooklyn portion of the F subway line. Specifically, we ask that the MTA restore limited northbound F express service for morning commuters traveling from Coney Island to Manhattan and southbound F express service for evening commuters traveling from Manhattan back to Coney Island. We also ask that the MTA remain vigilant and work to remedy noise and vibration issues experienced by residents of neighborhoods directly above F express and local tracks.

The benefits of restoring the F train express service in Brooklyn would be felt throughout the borough with decreased travel time to Manhattan, decreased delays along the entire line, and a better quality of life for all subway riders in our communities. The F train consistently ranks among the most delayed lines in the MTA system and was specifically targeted for improvements by the MTA in the October 2009 Full-Line Review. Many of our communities are experiencing continued population growth which has only added to the crowded trains and delayed service. Add to this the fact that 19 of the 22 Brooklyn stops along the F train have seen increases in ridership over the last year and the combination results in a hectic, stressful commute for the residents of southern Brooklyn. The MTA’s review of 2013 ridership ratesshows Brooklyn as having the largest increase in ridership, with the increase being “driven by strong growth on the Canarsie L, crosstown G, and Culver F lines.” It is clear that there has been a longstanding issue along the F line in Brooklyn which has only been exasperated by population and ridership increases.

In addition, many other subway lines that service Brooklyn already have express service available at least part of the time. For example, the B train runs express along the entire Brighton line, while the N and D trains also run express in Brooklyn. It is time to extend that service to the people who live and work along the F line and the businesses that serve them. Doing so will shorten commutes, reduce unnecessary delays, and lessen the stress on the Brooklyn residents who rely on the F train while simultaneously helping to address a critical need the MTA has already acknowledged.

We are aware that the MTA is currently reviewing services along the F line as the Culver Viaduct rehabilitation project nears completion. Given the realities discussed above, it is imperative that the MTA respond to the increased ridership rates and seriously consider restoring F train express service in Brooklyn, while also maintaining current local F train headways, to improve the quality of life for all the residents of our growing communities. We eagerly await your response.

Sincerely,
Eric L. Adams - Brooklyn Borough President
Hakeem Jeffries - Member of Congress
Jerrold Nadler - Member of Congress
Michael G. Grimm - Member of Congress
Martin J. Golden - New York State Senator
Diane Savino - New York State Senator
Daniel Squadron - New York State Senator
James Brennan - New York State Assembly Member
Steven Cymbrowitz - New York State Assembly Member
William Colton - New York State Assembly Member
Joan L. Millman - New York State Assembly Member
Stephen Levin - New York City Council Member
David Greenfield - New York City Council Member
Mark Treyger - New York City Council Member

 

 

[Quill Depot]

The is defiantly better than any , even with Culver Express. Bypasses jam-packed stops every now and then won't raise costs too much. I thought that certain locals could also short turn at Church.

[BronxBombers]

If people really want a Culver Express than just make the serve the local stops between Bergen-Church and make run express. Yes it will eliminate your one seat ride into Manhattan but it would also reduce delays at Bergen St. That's the only option that the MTA can do at this point. All they need to do is fix up the Bergen Street station.

[46Dover]

If people really want a Culver Express than just make the serve the local stops between Bergen-Church and make run express. Yes it will eliminate your one seat ride into Manhattan but it would also reduce delays at Bergen St. That's the only option that the MTA can do at this point. All they need to do is fix up the Bergen Street station.

A shame to waste all that trackage, huh?

[YankeesPwnMets]

If people really want a Culver Express than just make the serve the local stops between Bergen-Church and make run express. Yes it will eliminate your one seat ride into Manhattan but it would also reduce delays at Bergen St. That's the only option that the MTA can do at this point. All they need to do is fix up the Bergen Street station.

And we'll just pretend to not see the shitstorm that Park Slope riders will throw once they realize that they'll lose a one seat ride to Midtown