Jump to content

No. 5 trains are the most delayed of the MTA subway lines — and there’s no solution in sight


Harry

Recommended Posts

Just to point out for the #5 train, the two trains to Bowling Green are parked by the loop in-case something happens as in if there's a delay, then two of them fill in for service but normally, they arrive at Bowling Green during the PM between 3:50-4:20 and depart by 5-5:30PM to Nereid Av. 

 

This also happens during the AM, but both follow the (2) line after E.180 St

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Would it be possible to extend (5) service late nights to Manhattan Grand Central-42nd St instead of just terminating at E 180th St in the Bronx?

Similar concept to the (3) terminating at Times Square during late nights.

 

-This could eliminate the necessity for (those riders wishing to go to the east side from the Dyre Ave branch or the WPR branch south of E 180th St) and transfer over to the (2) at E 180th and/or transfer over to the (4) at 149th Grand Concourse to get to Manhattan's east side. Where as you can get a one ride seat on the (5) towards the east side instead.

 

-Since the (4) goes local late nights on the (6) line tracks making all stops, this would allow the (5) to use the express tracks going to/from Grand Central 42nd St. There's crossovers on the express tracks north of Grand Central so it could be possible but again just a thought if in fact it could be done at all.

It's possible, but highly unlikely. Running the (5) to Grand Central would be around three times as long as the current late night run of the (3) from Lenox Terminal to Times Square.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's possible, but highly unlikely. Running the (5) to Grand Central would be around three times as long as the current late night run of the (3) from Lenox Terminal to Times Square.

Plus the (5) is OPTO. They aren't gonna run half a train down Lex, even late at night lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plus the (5) is OPTO. They aren't gonna run half a train down Lex, even late at night lol

Especially when the (5) is a de-facto weekday only line.

 

The conspiracy theorist in me remembers the last time they made a de facto change on a certain (now former) Queens Boulevard line some years ago before a permanent cut was made (and it's not the (V) ...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Especially when the (5) is a de-facto weekday only line.

 

The conspiracy theorist in me remembers the last time they made a de facto change on a certain (now former) Queens Boulevard line some years ago before a permanent cut was made (and it's not the (V) ...)

Hopefully the never-ending suspensions will end after the Dyre Ave signal replacement next year. It is reminiscent of that old line though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Especially when the (5) is a de-facto weekday only line.

 

The conspiracy theorist in me remembers the last time they made a de facto change on a certain (now former) Queens Boulevard line some years ago before a permanent cut was made (and it's not the (V) ...)

I wouldn't be surprised. Lex can survive on the weekends with the (4)(6) as long as all runs are filled (and the (4) doesn't end at Brooklyn Bridge with the (6)<_<). When a run disappears the line goes to hell and back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MTA could run (5) OPTO to 149 St GC overnight. They run the (M) OPTO to Essex or Chambers on weekends.

Now that I can agree with. But they would need to make the (5) full-length and adding more trains. As it stands now, they only use about 4 half sets, or 2 whole trainsets. Nowhere near enough to maintain overnight headways with an extension.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that I can agree with. But they would need to make the (5) full-length and adding more trains. As it stands now, they only use about 4 half sets, or 2 whole trainsets. Nowhere near enough to maintain overnight headways with an extension.

Wouldn't that interfere with the (2) ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully the never-ending suspensions will end after the Dyre Ave signal replacement next year. It is reminiscent of that old line though.

With 8 minute weekend headways coming soon to the (2) it's only a matter of time until the (5) is reduced to a permanent Dyre shuttle on Saturdays/Sundays/Holidays...

 

Writing's just about on the wall now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Especially when the (5) is a de-facto weekday only line.

 

The conspiracy theorist in me remembers the last time they made a de facto change on a certain (now former) Queens Boulevard line some years ago before a permanent cut was made (and it's not the (V) ...)

 

The thing is for all those years, they still had to budget to pay the crews for running all the way to Forest Hills, even if they ended up short-turning at Court Square.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With 8 minute weekend headways coming soon to the (2) it's only a matter of time until the (5) is reduced to a permanent Dyre shuttle on Saturdays/Sundays/Holidays...

 

Writing's just about on the wall now.

I don't see what one has to do with the other. Reducing the headways on the (2) while also turning the off-hours (5) into the Dyre Ave shuttle is still a service reduction on the White Plains Rd line, not to mention the severe cut to service on the Lexington Ave line.

 

Also, unlike the (G), which was cut back to Court Sq for frivolous reasons, whenever the (5) was cut back to E 180 Street southbound, there has usually been a legitimate reason for it. There's another thing to keep in mind regarding the (5). For a while, this off and on Joralemon closure notwithstanding, the service would be the opposite of what you're envisioning. There'd be no service between Dyre Av and E 180 Street while trains ran to Bowling Green normally.

 

Obviously, we'll have to see what happens, but I can't see the (5) being a weekend shuttle, nor can I see the riders accepting this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want a fix for the IRT lines that would actually last, it would probably come down to actually rebuilding the junction at Franklin Avenue so (5) trains don't have to cross over the local track. Probably more doable on the lower level than on the upper level... would require some masterful engineering either way, so it's highly unlikely to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is for all those years, they still had to budget to pay the crews for running all the way to Forest Hills, even if they ended up short-turning at Court Square.

But if the rationale for cutting back the G was because of construction, don't they have to bring it back to Queens Blvd when the CBTC is completed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if the rationale for cutting back the G was because of construction, don't they have to bring it back to Queens Blvd when the CBTC is completed?

 

They dont have to do anything. At this point it would make more sense to make the (M) to Queens full time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if the rationale for cutting back the G was because of construction, don't they have to bring it back to Queens Blvd when the CBTC is completed?

 

The original rationale was because of construction. Once the budget cuts came along, they said "due to construction, we're not running the service anyway, but even if we had the capacity, we don't think it's worth the money, so we're not running it even once construction is complete)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't the Dyre Avenue line use to be a railroad?

LMGTFY. And I found it in 2 clicks:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRT_Dyre_Avenue_Line

History

 

The Dyre Avenue Line was originally part of the four-track main line of the New York, Westchester and Boston Railway, an electrified commuter line that connected White Plains and Port Chester, New York to a station at the Harlem River adjacent to the IRT Third Avenue Line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.