Kingjunior34 Posted July 27, 2016 Share #51 Posted July 27, 2016 .. I think the E train via Hoyt street is a good idea but the Mta won't do it Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallyhorse Posted July 27, 2016 Share #52 Posted July 27, 2016 .. I think the E train via Hoyt street is a good idea but the Mta won't do it Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app It's probably very difficult to do anyway and would be a VERY roundabout route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh Pond Posted July 27, 2016 Share #53 Posted July 27, 2016 It's probably very difficult to do anyway and would be a VERY roundabout route. For once I actually agree with him. You would have to pretty much rebuild the station just to get them to connect track-wise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailRunRob Posted July 27, 2016 Author Share #54 Posted July 27, 2016 Data..data..data https://carto.com/blog/looking-at-the-l/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailRunRob Posted July 27, 2016 Author Share #55 Posted July 27, 2016 More detailed map of alternative route usage..based on travel time. and Shuttlebus. https://team.carto.com/u/mamataakella/viz/5259fece-be2c-11e5-9d6a-0e98b61680bf/public_map Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Around the Horn Posted July 27, 2016 Share #56 Posted July 27, 2016 Data..data..data https://carto.com/blog/looking-at-the-l/ I for one am glad to see my rail fan wanderings from Bay Ridge to the L made that first location map...[emoji23] Sent from my iPod touch using NYC Transit Forums mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailRunRob Posted July 27, 2016 Author Share #57 Posted July 27, 2016 I for one am glad to see my rail fan wanderings from Bay Ridge to the L made that first location map...[emoji23] Sent from my iPod touch using NYC Transit Forums mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNewYorkElevated Posted July 28, 2016 Share #58 Posted July 28, 2016 lol Anyways, about that proposal... No way is that gonna happen. The would not take this well. Also, did the guys who proposed this idea really think about the capacity Court Square could take with this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CenSin Posted July 28, 2016 Share #59 Posted July 28, 2016 No way is that gonna happen. The would not take this well. Also, did the guys who proposed this idea really think about the capacity Court Square could take with this? Court Square isn’t even a proper terminal. The middle track was clearly for holding revenue trains or work trains. Throwing the into the mix would prevent it from running 15 TPH due to the inefficiency of Court Square’s configuration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailRunRob Posted July 28, 2016 Author Share #60 Posted July 28, 2016 lol Anyways, about that proposal... No way is that gonna happen. The would not take this well. Also, did the guys who proposed this idea really think about the capacity Court Square could take with this? The short answer more than likely is no. Generally speaking from what I've learnt over the past few years in revisiting the world transit is that unless you have a background in transit or some type of transit planning engineering or railroad management, these concepts, for the most part, are out of grasp for most they can't see nor understand the complexity of the big picture. In this guys defence, He did have some sense to understand the layout out of the station and it's the immediate area and attributes. So it wasn't fully just a shot in the dark. Just not far enough to link the things that connect. Like the line in general feeding into the station. breakpoints and funnelling issues with increased traffic and to larger exsent rolling stock availability and assignment. As CenSin said with the proposed terminal limitations. One would have to do to their due diligence on that especially if they fully understood the process. So I'd have to say he doesn't understand the Subway as an infrastructure but like most more as a map and dot's to connect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted July 28, 2016 Share #61 Posted July 28, 2016 It would take longer to build the switches than it would take to rebuilt the Canarsie Tubes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHV9218 Posted July 29, 2016 Share #62 Posted July 29, 2016 The via has an issue with the switch construction at Hoyt, I agree, but this capacity claim seems ridiculous. The underused Rutgers Tube could easily accommodate or service to ease the Cranberry, and there would be no stations unserved between West 4th and Jay St. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted July 29, 2016 Share #63 Posted July 29, 2016 The via has an issue with the switch construction at Hoyt, I agree, but this capacity claim seems ridiculous. The underused Rutgers Tube could easily accommodate or service to ease the Cranberry, and there would be no stations unserved between West 4th and Jay St. Would the switches at West Fourth be able to handle such a service. Also, as it was alredy mentioned, most L riders are not in that area. I think that service should be incresed during the closure and extended to Rockaway Parkway so that those riders have a one-seat ride to Midtown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted July 30, 2016 Share #64 Posted July 30, 2016 The via has an issue with the switch construction at Hoyt, I agree, but this capacity claim seems ridiculous. The underused Rutgers Tube could easily accommodate or service to ease the Cranberry, and there would be no stations unserved between West 4th and Jay St. And, pray tell, how would you shove the , , and in between W4 and Bway-Lafayette? Cutting the is nonsense, and the is supposed to be boosted during the construction work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted July 30, 2016 Share #65 Posted July 30, 2016 Something would have to give under any plan to pull the into Brooklyn. It's just a matter of which riders get the short end of the stick. If the were to run via Cranberry with the and , you run the risk of creating a logjam on the approaches to the Cranberry tubes because, even if only half of the trains run to Brooklyn, that's still 25 trains per hour under less than ideal circumstances. More than likely, you'll have to cut some trains to fit those trains in. If those trains run via Rutgers, it's already jumping into the mess that is the and via Houston St. As mentioned above, cutting service on the latter is absolutely not an option with the Canarsie tube closure. Again, none of this addresses the big question, which is what is the point of sending the up the Crosstown line? Who's commute is this supposed to improve? While this offers a direct service to Manhattan, it's too roundabout of a route to be useful, especially if riders are north of Bedford-Nostrand Avs on the Crosstown line. Most riders will use the Jamaica line for faster service to Manhattan via a transfer over a meandering one-seat ride to midtown west. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bstar1 Posted July 30, 2016 Share #66 Posted July 30, 2016 What would happen if ran into Brooklyn and replaced making local stops to Euclid. Then replaced to World Trade Center and run to 168 St. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3F Posted July 30, 2016 Share #67 Posted July 30, 2016 That would most likely be overserving the Fulton Local stations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonyboy515 Posted July 30, 2016 Share #68 Posted July 30, 2016 To supplement service to Manhattan other than to extend the in a loop to Court Square, why not extend the to Court Square and make an local and an <A> express on Fulton Street? Sent from my iPad using NYC Transit Forums mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailRunRob Posted July 30, 2016 Author Share #69 Posted July 30, 2016 To supplement service to Manhattan other than to extend the in a loop to Court Square, why not extend the to Court Square and make an local and an <A> express on Fulton Street? Sent from my iPad using NYC Transit Forums mobile app Could you maintain current headways with your plan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonyboy515 Posted July 30, 2016 Share #70 Posted July 30, 2016 Could you maintain current headways with your plan?Well, I guess with the going away, you can't keep the current headways. I didn't think about that. How about making a new or service to run between 14 Street and Court Square? Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Or, maybe just a simple shuttle between 14 Street and Court Square Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Porter Posted July 30, 2016 Share #71 Posted July 30, 2016 The Mall at the WTC is about to open two direct connections to the terminus, so they'd look awful silly if the line were rerouted away from the complex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonyboy515 Posted July 30, 2016 Share #72 Posted July 30, 2016 The Mall at the WTC is about to open two direct connections to the terminus, so they'd look awful silly if the line were rerouted away from the complex.How does that help supplement the ? The looping around is way too confusing. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailRunRob Posted July 31, 2016 Author Share #73 Posted July 31, 2016 Well, I guess with the going away, you can't keep the current headways. I didn't think about that. How about making a new or service to run between 14 Street and Court Square? Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Or, maybe just a simple shuttle between 14 Street and Court Square Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Where would you turn trains at 14th street? Also, what are planning for headways? And can Cranberry tubes handle the extra trains? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T to Dyre Avenue Posted July 31, 2016 Share #74 Posted July 31, 2016 Would the switches at West Fourth be able to handle such a service. Also, as it was alredy mentioned, most L riders are not in that area. I think that service should be incresed during the closure and extended to Rockaway Parkway so that those riders have a one-seat ride to Midtown.I'd also like to see some service to Rockaway Parkway during the closure. Maybe call it the to distinguish it from the regular to/from Metro. What would happen if ran into Brooklyn and replaced making local stops to Euclid. Then replaced to World Trade Center and run to 168 St. That would most likely be overserving the Fulton Local stations.Could they then split the so that half run to/from Euclid and the other half run onto the line after Schermerhorn? Maybe use or for the Crosstown-bound trains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallyhorse Posted July 31, 2016 Share #75 Posted July 31, 2016 I'd also like to see some service to Rockaway Parkway during the closure. Maybe call it the to distinguish it from the regular to/from Metro. Could they then split the so that half run to/from Euclid and the other half run onto the line after Schermerhorn? Maybe use or for the Crosstown-bound trains. Lets just say there is a better chance of my previously proposed idea of re-routing the to Canarsie (and shortening the to Broadway Junction) with the replacing the to Euclid than the idea of building a new connection and having the run with the to Court Square. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.