W train coming back this fall

[bobtehpanda]

I'm surprised the to 96th Street on the weekends idea didn't come up. To be honest, it's not such a bad idea because 1, the can be extended back up to Astoria for the during the weekends. 2, the is going to be shut down during this period so giving riders a 1 seat option from Brooklyn to Manhattan is a good idea. 3, the switches at 57th Street don't need to get abused as much on the weekends since all 2 services are going to the same terminal.

 

They already have a one-seat ride to Manhattan on weekends; change at Essex.

 

It's also a notification of a meeting about the , and has nothing to do with the , so it's out of the scope of this meeting.

[Javier]

Technically the meeting is about Second Avenue and Broadway service, plus the came into the discussion.

 

And yea I have been smoking that good stuff

 

But the weekend change at Essex St is a hassle. The way how my idea works out still preserves the Astoria which will make less confusion, plus the could become the new .

[bobtehpanda]

Technically the meeting is about Second Avenue and Broadway service, plus the came into the discussion.

 

And yea I have been smoking that good stuff

 

But the weekend change at Essex St is a hassle. The way how my idea works out still preserves the Astoria which will make less confusion, plus the could become the new .

 

The is a Broadway service. The is not.

 

If you wanted to reduce confusion, routing the to 96 St would be the last thing you would want to do. "The train goes to Queens on weekdays, but somewhere completely different on weekends!"

[Javier]

The is a Broadway service. The is not.

 

If you wanted to reduce confusion, routing the to 96 St would be the last thing you would want to do. "The train goes to Queens on weekdays, but somewhere completely different on weekends!"

Wait what?

[Wallyhorse]

Been smoking the good stuff with Wallyhorse, haven't you?

     

 

 

 

The is a Broadway service. The is not.

 

If you wanted to reduce confusion, routing the to 96 St would be the last thing you would want to do. "The train goes to Queens on weekdays, but somewhere completely different on weekends!"

Which is EXACTLY why I came up with the / split in the first place!

 

The in this case is the except it would go to 96th Street and 2nd Avenue rather than 71-Continental for reasons already well documented elsewhere.

[Daniel The Cool]

I'm surprised the to 96th Street on the weekends idea didn't come up. To be honest, it's not such a bad idea because 1, the can be extended back up to Astoria for the during the weekends. 2, the is going to be shut down during this period so giving riders a 1 seat option from Brooklyn to Manhattan is a good idea. 3, the switches at 57th Street don't need to get abused as much on the weekends since all 2 services are going to the same terminal.

 

For Example:

 

In Broadway:

to 96th St-2 Av weekends only via 2 Av Lcl. Late nights to Myrtle Av for .

 

To Astoria-Ditmars via Broadway Exp all times. Late nights via Whitehall.

 

to 96th St-2 Av all times except weekends. Weekends to Astoria-Ditmars Blvd via Astoria Lcl. Other times use for service to 96th St.

 

to Astoria-Ditmars via Astoria Lcl all times except late nights and weekends. Other times use for service to 96th St.

 

to 145th Street via Queens Blvd Lcl/4 AV Lcl all times except late nights. Other times use for service to Lower Manhattan.

 

No, just no.

[RTS9000]

 

They really should extend the past Whitehall as soon as they can - I remember an instance where I was in an train that was held up because of a train waiting to terminate at Whitehall.

[bobtehpanda]

Wait what?

 

I meant to say that the is a Broadway service, but the is not, hence in a meeting about Broadway service, no one will end up talking about the .

[Caelestor]

Are we even certain that the SAS needs a second service? Considering that the nearby only gets 8-minute headways, and the SAS is a 3-stop extension.

[Wallyhorse]

Are we even certain that the SAS needs a second service? Considering that the nearby only gets 8-minute headways, and the SAS is a 3-stop extension.

I'm pretty sure it will be needed.  

 

The is one of the most overcrowded lines in the system as I understand it and many people don't even bother with the Lexington Avenue Line if they can avoid it because of that.  There are many who also live well east of Lexington (particularly east of 2nd Avenue for whom the SAS will likely mean they will be more easily able to take the subway (especially since if for example you live on East End Avenue and 86th, it's a half-mile walk just to get to the and there.  

 

What I think will be happening is you will get those tired of taking the and because of those lines being notoriously overcrowded taking the and if for example they work around Grand Central taking the to Times Square and either the or to Grand Central, especially if they work on either extreme end crosstown that Grand Central covers (Madison Avenue on the , 3rd Avenue on the ).

 

That is one of the reasons why I would be looking to do the / split for the tunnel shutdown with that actually starting as soon as work on the Myrtle Avenue EL (what's left of it) is complete and the is back on its normal route.

[I love Trains99]

They really should extend the past Whitehall as soon as they can - I remember an instance where I was in an train that was held up because of a train waiting to terminate at Whitehall.

That won't be happening anytime soon. 

[bstar1]

Or they should make W go to 9Av on West End line and also serve 4Av loc to help out R.

[Metro CSW]

Or they should make W go to 9Av on West End line and also serve 4Av loc to help out R.

Lol. This is kinda getting old....

 

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

[Lance]

I'm surprised the M to 96th Street on the weekends idea didn't come up. To be honest, it's not such a bad idea because 1, the Q can be extended back up to Astoria for the W during the weekends. 2, the L is going to be shut down during this period so giving riders a 1 seat option from Brooklyn to Manhattan is a good idea. 3, the switches at 57th Street don't need to get abused as much on the weekends since all 2 services are going to the same terminal.

 

For Example:

 

In Broadway:

M to 96th St-2 Av weekends only via 2 Av Lcl. Late nights to Myrtle Av for J .

 

N To Astoria-Ditmars via Broadway Exp all times. Late nights via Whitehall.

 

Q to 96th St-2 Av all times except weekends. Weekends to Astoria-Ditmars Blvd via Astoria Lcl. Other times use M for service to 96th St.

 

W to Astoria-Ditmars via Astoria Lcl all times except late nights and weekends. Other times use Q for service to 96th St.

 

R to 145th Street via Queens Blvd Lcl/4 AV Lcl all times except late nights. Other times use N for service to Lower Manhattan.

Not that this really matters, but your plan removes all service to 96 Street during overnight hours. Also, I'm going to assume you meant 179 Street as the northern terminus for the and not 145 Street.

 

The R is a Broadway service. The M is not.

 

If you wanted to reduce confusion, routing the M to 96 St would be the last thing you would want to do. "The train goes to Queens on weekdays, but somewhere completely different on weekends!"

That's something we've been trying to drill into other members' heads for quite some time. There's a reason why most routes remain the same with little changes throughout all periods of the day/week. Most riders like their commutes to be as simple as possible. Having routes run one way at <X> time and a completely different way at <Y> time or on <Z> day of the week is counter-productive to that goal. Sometimes, I feel like we're talking to a brick wall.

 

I'm pretty sure it will be needed.  

 

The 6 is one of the most overcrowded lines in the system as I understand it and many people don't even bother with the Lexington Avenue Line if they can avoid it because of that.  There are many who also live well east of Lexington (particularly east of 2nd Avenue for whom the SAS will likely mean they will be more easily able to take the subway (especially since if for example you live on East End Avenue and 86th, it's a half-mile walk just to get to the 4 5 and 6 there.  

 

What I think will be happening is you will get those tired of taking the 4 5 and 6 because of those lines being notoriously overcrowded taking the Q and if for example they work around Grand Central taking the Q to Times Square and either the S or 7 to Grand Central, especially if they work on either extreme end crosstown that Grand Central covers (Madison Avenue on the S, 3rd Avenue on the 7 ).

If a rider is coming from the Upper East Side and their destination is in the Grand Central area, they are not using the train. I can almost guarantee it. Few people are going to double-back crosstown using the to go to Times Square and then use the or 42nd Street shuttle to get back to the east side. Talk about a pointless trip. 

[Wallyhorse]

If a rider is coming from the Upper East Side and their destination is in the Grand Central area, they are not using the train. I can almost guarantee it. Few people are going to double-back crosstown using the to go to Times Square and then use the or 42nd Street shuttle to get back to the east side. Talk about a pointless trip. 

Not if you work on say Madison and 42nd and you live on say York Avenue and 86th Street for example.

 

In that scenario, instead of walking almost a half-mile to get the or at Lexington and 86th, you can walk two blocks to 86th and 2nd and get what should be a considerably less crowded to Times Square and then take the Shuttle to Grand Central, but go out the back at Madison and 42nd.   

 

People like that, especially those who work on Madison Avenue might take that route even if it involved a transfer just to avoid dealing with the crush-loads on Lex.

[tripleeye49]

@tripleeye: I'm not sure what it is you're suggesting here. Shifting the over to the local tracks while having the extended run express is the exact same thing as having the continue to run express while simply extending the from Whitehall St to wherever. Ignoring the fact there aren't cars for the to run from anywhere besides Ditmars Blvd to Whitehall St, even with the incoming R179 order, the primary line that serves the Sea Beach line has to run express on 4th Ave 19/7. Secondly, running another service on Sea Beach is extremely wasteful. 4th Avenue, specifically the local, needs help. Sea Beach, not so much.

 

@Lance - Basically making the 24/7 train run local at all times, with some trains short turning at Whitehall Street, and having the part time train run express and over the bridge into Brooklyn and either via West End or Sea Beach.  I believe that it would be less confusing that way, but others disagree.  

 

Basically transit buffs (not knocking anyone) like to switch the services depending on time of day and take more into account things like rolling stock (which don't get me wrong is a viable thing to think of), but the average person would like things more simplified; they would rather not think about what runs when, just does this train get me there; folks don't like worrying about whether at a certain time I have to take something else.

  

Some have preference of it being called the W Local and the N Express, I chose the N to be the 24/7 train and thereby the local, and the W the part time express.   Initially would have to be over West End because of repair work to Sea Beach.  The N being the full time local from Astoria via Whitehall would have alternating trains terminating at Whitehall and continuing to Brooklyn to help the R train during the day and replace it at night.  In the report about why they brought back the old service pattern, they considered this, but because of the rolling stock issue denied it.  Also they took an Astoria resident stance on the whole N/W situation, instead of looking at the big picture of the entire routing of all lines, because they felt Astoria residents would find less confusing the W to Whitehall during the weekdays because of the previous pattern.  The findings of the MTA if they were posted along the 4th Avenue line would enrage residents of Sunset Park, and Bay Ridge for sure.

 

Here is what Andrew Albeert said about it (Source):

 

MTA board member Andrew Albert voiced concerns and recommended that the train’s route extend all the way to Bay Parkway during rush hour.

 

“Having the R the only train along local stations on Fourth Ave. in rapidly developing areas of southern Brooklyn, is just not enough,” Albert said.

 

Also there is this article:

NYC pols urge MTA to audit 'completely unpredictable' R train after riders’ complaints of regular delays 

 

I'm open to having a part time express train running from Astoria to Bay Parkway, but having the train run along Sea Beach would mean they would have their choice of express or local service within Brooklyn (a bone thrown to them for having the 24/7 become local; part time express service with it means they lose no service), while allowing the 24/7 train to run local entirely along its route.

 

The MTA missed an opportunity to kill two birds with one stone in this case (Astoria & 4th Avenue).  With the shutdown of the L train, M service needs to be heavily increased, and some of the stock should be transferred to the G, M, and N train routes to cover Queens Boulevard, Broadway and 4th Avenue to help out with that.  All train routes mentioned would need headways no less than 5 minutes to cover; and peak times on Queens Blvd, no less than 3 minutes if possible.  A third stone with the looming L train shutdown.

[Lance]

Not if you work on say Madison and 42nd and you live on say York Avenue and 86th Street for example.

 

In that scenario, instead of walking almost a half-mile to get the or at Lexington and 86th, you can walk two blocks to 86th and 2nd and get what should be a considerably less crowded to Times Square and then take the Shuttle to Grand Central, but go out the back at Madison and 42nd.   

 

People like that, especially those who work on Madison Avenue might take that route even if it involved a transfer just to avoid dealing with the crush-loads on Lex.

I think you're severely overstating the amount of people willing to take such a circuitous route to get from the Upper East Side to Madison Ave and the 40s just to avoid the Lexington Ave line, but whatever. It makes no difference to me either way.

 

@Lance - Basically making the 24/7 train run local at all times, with some trains short turning at Whitehall Street, and having the part time train run express and over the bridge into Brooklyn and either via West End or Sea Beach.  I believe that it would be less confusing that way, but others disagree.  

 

Basically transit buffs (not knocking anyone) like to switch the services depending on time of day and take more into account things like rolling stock (which don't get me wrong is a viable thing to think of), but the average person would like things more simplified; they would rather not think about what runs when, just does this train get me there; folks don't like worrying about whether at a certain time I have to take something else.

  

Some have preference of it being called the W Local and the N Express, I chose the N to be the 24/7 train and thereby the local, and the W the part time express.   Initially would have to be over West End because of repair work to Sea Beach.  The N being the full time local from Astoria via Whitehall would have alternating trains terminating at Whitehall and continuing to Brooklyn to help the R train during the day and replace it at night.  In the report about why they brought back the old service pattern, they considered this, but because of the rolling stock issue denied it.  Also they took an Astoria resident stance on the whole N/W situation, instead of looking at the big picture of the entire routing of all lines, because they felt Astoria residents would find less confusing the W to Whitehall during the weekdays because of the previous pattern.  The findings of the MTA if they were posted along the 4th Avenue line would enrage residents of Sunset Park, and Bay Ridge for sure.

 

Here is what Andrew Albeert said about it (Source):

 

MTA board member Andrew Albert voiced concerns and recommended that the train’s route extend all the way to Bay Parkway during rush hour.

 

“Having the R the only train along local stations on Fourth Ave. in rapidly developing areas of southern Brooklyn, is just not enough,” Albert said.

 

Also there is this article:

NYC pols urge MTA to audit 'completely unpredictable' R train after riders’ complaints of regular delays 

 

I'm open to having a part time express train running from Astoria to Bay Parkway, but having the train run along Sea Beach would mean they would have their choice of express or local service within Brooklyn (a bone thrown to them for having the 24/7 become local; part time express service with it means they lose no service), while allowing the 24/7 train to run local entirely along its route.

 

The MTA missed an opportunity to kill two birds with one stone in this case (Astoria & 4th Avenue).  With the shutdown of the L train, M service needs to be heavily increased, and some of the stock should be transferred to the G, M, and N train routes to cover Queens Boulevard, Broadway and 4th Avenue to help out with that.  All train routes mentioned would need headways no less than 5 minutes to cover; and peak times on Queens Blvd, no less than 3 minutes if possible.  A third stone with the looming L train shutdown.

Keeping the as it is has nothing to do with transit buffs. For about five decades, the has been synonymous with the Sea Beach Express line. In fact, it's one of the two South Brooklyn lines to remain the same over the years, with the being the other. Changing the routing of the to a full local with the as the Sea Beach express would confuse many riders who have become quite accustomed to that route.

 

As for an additional 4th Ave route, few people are disputing that the needs some kind of help. The problem is that there are no cars for such an improvement at the time. That's why the cannot go anywhere besides Whitehall St at the moment. Regarding your comment that the MTA should add more cars to the and lines during the Canarsie tunnel closure, the MTA is already planning on doing that in a fashion. There still will not be enough cars for an extension past Whitehall St; not until the 211s are ordered and on property.

[tripleeye49]

I think you're severely overstating the amount of people willing to take such a circuitous route to get from the Upper East Side to Madison Ave and the 40s just to avoid the Lexington Ave line, but whatever. It makes no difference to me either way.

 

Keeping the as it is has nothing to do with transit buffs. For about five decades, the has been synonymous with the Sea Beach Express line. In fact, it's one of the two South Brooklyn lines to remain the same over the years, with the being the other. Changing the routing of the to a full local with the as the Sea Beach express would confuse many riders who have become quite accustomed to that route.

 

As for an additional 4th Ave route, few people are disputing that the needs some kind of help. The problem is that there are no cars for such an improvement at the time. That's why the cannot go anywhere besides Whitehall St at the moment. Regarding your comment that the MTA should add more cars to the and lines during the Canarsie tunnel closure, the MTA is already planning on doing that in a fashion. There still will not be enough cars for an extension past Whitehall St; not until the 211s are ordered and on property.

 

I understand the car shortage issue needs to be fixed before implementing such service, but even when I suggested the N running local in all boroughs at all times, I always suggested that alternate trains terminate at Whitehall, while the rest go to Brooklyn thinking of that.  

 

Something I would suggest would be to run N Local and W express service from Sea Beach to pick up Bay Ridge customers going into Manhattan, and Queens passengers on Broadway can switch to 24/7 M service from 34th Street during the Canarsie Closure.  Most of the R46 cars from Jamaica can go to Coney Island for the time being to supplement, N/W and G service during that time.  Then you just need enough cars to have the M run every 3 - 5 minutes during peak hours to handle Queens Blvd. as it would be the only local at that time.

 

I know that the F runs the most trains during peak hours at 45 trains running.  How many does the L, M, N, and R trains run?

[MysteriousBtrain]

I understand the car shortage issue needs to be fixed before implementing such service, but even when I suggested the N running local in all boroughs at all times, I always suggested that alternate trains terminate at Whitehall, while the rest go to Brooklyn thinking of that.

 

Something I would suggest would be to run N Local and W express service from Sea Beach to pick up Bay Ridge customers going into Manhattan, and Queens passengers on Broadway can switch to 24/7 M service from 34th Street during the Canarsie Closure. Most of the R46 cars from Jamaica can go to Coney Island for the time being to supplement, N/W and G service during that time. Then you just need enough cars to have the M run every 3 - 5 minutes during peak hours to handle Queens Blvd. as it would be the only local at that time.

How many times do we have to say this won't work? We have too many Wallyhorses lying around, and another would bring a lot of disturbance to the force.

[Metro CSW]

 

 

I understand the car shortage issue needs to be fixed before implementing such service, but even when I suggested the N running local in all boroughs at all times, I always suggested that alternate trains terminate at Whitehall, while the rest go to Brooklyn thinking of that.

Yes, you always do and lord, it gets tiresome at times. And also that's why we have the to Whitehall for!

 

Something I would suggest would be to run N Local and W express service from Sea Beach to pick up Bay Ridge customers going into Manhattan, and Queens passengers on Broadway can switch to 24/7 M service from 34th Street during the Canarsie Closure. Most of the R46 cars from Jamaica can go to Coney Island for the time being to supplement, N/W and G service during that time. Then you just need enough cars to have the M run every 3 - 5 minutes during peak hours to handle Queens Blvd. as it would be the only local at that time.

Again, I don't see how this will make a difference. If the somewhat does get extended to Brooklyn during peak hours, common sense say it will remain local because it's a part-time that really doesn't to infect the current 24/7 for that matter. It seems like some people here want to confuse the passengers lol. I would love to see the in Brooklyn again but let's just leave well-enough alone because it's already been "proposed to death" many times.

 

And finally, the shares track with other routes to have such a frequency. You may as well just count on a 5-7 minute headway pattern on peak hours, like now!

 

I know that the F runs the most trains during peak hours at 45 trains running. How many does the L, M, N, and R trains run?

Let's see:

= 19-20 TPH (peak between Myrtle-Wyckoff and 8 Ave), 10-11 TPH (off peak)

= 6-7 TPH

= 6 TPH

= 8-9 TPH (peak), 6-7 TPH (off peak)

 

 

 

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

[Javier]

There is another solution; leave the R32's and R42's in service. (Which probably won't happen.) This car shortage issue can't wait until the R211's arrive.

[Daniel The Cool]

How many times do we have to say this won't work? We have too many Wallyhorses lying around, and another would bring a lot of disturbance to the force.

LOL I actually find the comment hilarious. 

[Lance]

...Most of the R46 cars from Jamaica can go to Coney Island for the time being to supplement, N/W and G service during that time.  Then you just need enough cars to have the M run every 3 - 5 minutes during peak hours to handle Queens Blvd. as it would be the only local at that time.

 

I know that the F runs the most trains during peak hours at 45 trains running.  How many does the L, M, N, and R trains run?

So, what would run on the and lines? Or are you just going to eliminate the entirely? Either way, there aren't enough cars for that. Nor is there enough demand for that kind of service.

 

There is another solution; leave the R32's and R42's in service. (Which probably won't happen.) This car shortage issue can't wait until the R211's arrive.

The cost of maintenance increases as the cars age. The R32s and R42s are 52 and 47 years old respectively. While the cars are good enough for service, that will not be the case in another decade. That's why the MTA is planning on scrapping as many cars as possible without becoming a detriment to maintaining service.

[R10 2952]

I would be genuinely surprised to see R42s hit the 50-year mark LMAO...

[Javier]

That I understand, but they should've increased the R179 order to at least compensate for both the R32 retirement and more cars in the system.