news MTA board member wants (A) to serve Rockaways only...

[CenSin]

the Lefferts shuttle is always labeled with a yellow S bullet, not the regular bullet

At the very least, the map would be changed.

[Around the Horn]

At the very least, the map would be changed.

The trains themselves are labelled with a yellow because its the closest one on the rollsigns to the .

[CenSin]

The trains themselves are labelled with a yellow because its the closest one on the rollsigns to the .

With the to Lefferts Boulevard, they won’t have to! It’s what I’ve been trying to say all along… maybe I should write an introductory pre-face to explain so people don’t explain what I already know.

[BreeddekalbL]

also the movement to have the serve one branch only would be smart because of the people going to JFK 

[Jemorie]

With the to Lefferts Boulevard, they won’t have to! It’s what I’ve been trying to say all along… maybe I should write an introductory pre-face to explain so people don’t explain what I already know.

 

Sorry.

[Wallyhorse]

Also, the longer a route becomes, the more trains and crew you need to pay to run it. At night time, is the extra expense worth it? With the extension to Brooklyn/Queens, you double the length, requiring double the trains and double the crew.

 

If the is extended to Lefferts Boulevard, not much expense is added given that it’s only a handful of stations. At night, the shuttle would just be a instead of an as it is currently labeled.

Or the also becomes 24/7, running at all times to Lefferts while the runs all times to the Rockaways (with both lines late nights 4 TPH to accommodate the being split and running 2 TPH from each spot late nights and so the can be express late nights).  

[CenSin]

Or the also becomes 24/7, running at all times to Lefferts while the runs all times to the Rockaways (with both lines late nights 4 TPH to accommodate the being split and running 2 TPH from each spot late nights and so the can be express late nights).  

Why would you do that? That would be even more expensive than extending the to Lefferts Boulevard.

[Wallyhorse]

Why would you do that? That would be even more expensive than extending the to Lefferts Boulevard.

Politics.  Part of losing express service (other than a few rush-hour peak direction trains) is to compensate for that by eliminating the late-night shuttle, whether it's a 24/7 or extending the to Lefferts.  

[DaTransitMan4608]

I actually had my own way of going about doing this. In a way it's a bit simpler, but I think it's a lot like Wally's.

 

All trains go to Far Rockaway-Mott Ave.

 

All trains go to Lefferts and the runs Express in Manhattan.

 

Select trains (maybe every other train) go to Rockaway Park, running Express in Brooklyn.

[Wallyhorse]

I actually had my own way of going about doing this. In a way it's a bit simpler, but I think it's a lot like Wally's.

 

All trains go to Far Rockaway-Mott Ave.

 

All trains go to Lefferts and the runs Express in Manhattan.

 

Select trains (maybe every other train) go to Rockaway Park, running Express in Brooklyn.

There's a limit of 26 TPH per hour in the Cranberry Tunnel due to switching that is required at Hoyt-Schermerhorn and Canal Street.  This is one reason why if the were to go to Brooklyn via a new Schermerhorn Street Tunnel (including a stop at what currently is the Transit Museum, converted back to a regular subway station at Court Street), it would become the Fulton local to Euclid Avenue since that would allow the and to both run express on Fulton with the to the Rockaways and to Lefferts (and extended to Lefferts late nights). 

[biGC323232]

I actually had my own way of going about doing this. In a way it's a bit simpler, but I think it's a lot like Wally's.

 

All trains go to Far Rockaway-Mott Ave.

 

All trains go to Lefferts and the runs Express in Manhattan.

 

Select trains (maybe every other train) go to Rockaway Park, running Express in Brooklyn.

 

There's a limit of 26 TPH per hour in the Cranberry Tunnel due to switching that is required at Hoyt-Schermerhorn and Canal Street.  This is one reason why if the were to go to Brooklyn via a new Schermerhorn Street Tunnel (including a stop at what currently is the Transit Museum, converted back to a regular subway station at Court Street), it would become the Fulton local to Euclid Avenue since that would allow the and to both run express on Fulton with the to the Rockaways and to Lefferts (and extended to Lefferts late nights). 

Me personally the   can run 24/7....But the way things are set up the best way is to have the    run from 168st to lefferts all times except late nights..late nights  shuttle from lefferts to bway jct....  trains are not needed to lefferts..ill have all   trains terminating at far rock-and rockaway park at all times eliminating the transfer at broad channel making it a one ride into manhattan....Thats how i would do it....

[Wallyhorse]

Me personally the   can run 24/7....But the way things are set up the best way is to have the    run from 168st to lefferts all times except late nights..late nights  shuttle from lefferts to bway jct....  trains are not needed to lefferts..ill have all   trains terminating at far rock-and rockaway park at all times eliminating the transfer at broad channel making it a one ride into manhattan....Thats how i would do it....

Then you run the 24/7.  Residents in that area are going to expect a trade-off for the loss of the one-seat express ride (save for a few rush-hour peak-direction trains that would originate or end at Lefferts), which is why I would either have the 24/7 OR run the to Lefferts late nights. 

[T to Dyre Avenue]

There would still be a limited number of peak-direction trains to/from Lefferts in my plan in addition to the being full-time (except late nights when the would run there). Anyone who wants the in this scenario can others make a same-platform transfer anywhere between Rockaway Boulevard and Euclid Avenue.

 

No, no, no...that's not what you said in the previous post and that's not what I asked about. Here's what you previously posted:

 

The late nights to Lefferts would be to placate those on Lefferts who (except for a handful of peak-direction express trains) would be losing their one-seat express ride with the replacing the otherwise. That eliminates the late-night shuttle.

Look at the part in bold. That's the part I asked about. I understand retaining some rush hour express. I don't understand extending the to Lefferts during overnight hours and you haven't explained how that benefits Lefferts branch riders who would no longer have the express during non-rush hours. An overnight shuttle between Lefferts and either Euclid or Broadway Junction would be sufficient for overnight service, so that it doesn't duplicate the , like your extended would do.

 

Please explain how extending the late nights placates Lefferts riders who lose their daytime express. Can you?

[Lance]

Well, obviously those riders who currently use the express from Lefferts during the day will also use the line during overnight hours and will have to deal with shuttle service to Euclid Av, even if that shuttle has existed for nearly 25 years now. They will obviously not like that in the slightest, hence the extension of the from Chambers St to Lefferts Blvd during the owl periods. /s

 

On a more serious note, the only way to justify full-length service to/from Lefferts Blvd is through a significant growth of overnight ridership on that branch, which I don't believe has occurred. As many of us remember, before October 1992, the Lefferts branch was the primary branch of the and service to the Rockaways was provided by the Round-Robin . That was changed due to a higher ridership on the Rockaways branch, primarily due to JFK Airport. There's no need for absurdly long routes that serve no purpose other than nostalgia disguised as real service improvements.

[Around the Horn]

I actually had my own way of going about doing this. In a way it's a bit simpler, but I think it's a lot like Wally's.

 

All trains go to Far Rockaway-Mott Ave.

 

All trains go to Lefferts and the runs Express in Manhattan.

 

Select trains (maybe every other train) go to Rockaway Park, running Express in Brooklyn.

 

So we're going to start storing Jamaica R160's in Rockaway Park Yard? Remember that the  trains that terminate there get layed up there. Adding a deadhead or reverse peak  trip could mess up scheduling.

[Wallyhorse]

Well, obviously those riders who currently use the express from Lefferts during the day will also use the line during overnight hours and will have to deal with shuttle service to Euclid Av, even if that shuttle has existed for nearly 25 years now. They will obviously not like that in the slightest, hence the extension of the from Chambers St to Lefferts Blvd during the owl periods. /s

 

On a more serious note, the only way to justify full-length service to/from Lefferts Blvd is through a significant growth of overnight ridership on that branch, which I don't believe has occurred. As many of us remember, before October 1992, the Lefferts branch was the primary branch of the and service to the Rockaways was provided by the Round-Robin . That was changed due to a higher ridership on the Rockaways branch, primarily due to JFK Airport. There's no need for absurdly long routes that serve no purpose other than nostalgia disguised as real service improvements.

It's a psychological thing.  I'm sure constituents on Lefferts don't like the late-night if they have to go to Manhattan and if they are going to lose their one-seat ride with the being Rockaways only and the going to Lefferts (which actually increases service on both lines east of Euclid since the would serve both Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park) outside of a handful of peak-direction trains to/from Lefferts would want something in return, with in this case the elimination of the late-night shuttle being the compromise.

[CenSin]

It's a psychological thing.  I'm sure constituents on Lefferts don't like the late-night if they have to go to Manhattan and if they are going to lose their one-seat ride with the being Rockaways only and the going to Lefferts (which actually increases service on both lines east of Euclid since the would serve both Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park) outside of a handful of peak-direction trains to/from Lefferts would want something in return, with in this case the elimination of the late-night shuttle being the compromise.

Please, do connect the dots for us—in excruciating detail.

 

Premise A ∴ B ∴ C ∴ … ∴ X ∴ Y ∴ Conclusion Z

 

(∴ is the symbol for “therefore.”)

[Wallyhorse]

Please, do connect the dots for us—in excruciating detail.

 

Premise A ∴ B ∴ C ∴ … ∴ X ∴ Y ∴ Conclusion Z

 

(∴ is the symbol for “therefore.”)

Again, it's simply a compromise as noted.  No need to connect dots, it's simply a concession to give Lefferts residents something in return for losing most express service. 

 

A side benefit of this is late nights, you either have the from the Rockaways going express or you have both the and running local along Fulton, giving those riders a combined 6-7 TPH if both are local.

 

You could also late nights have the run from Canal Street-Lefferts Boulevard (using the express tracks at Canal to terminate).   That also might be a compromise that gives Lefferts riders a one-seat ride into lower Manhattan late nights and for those specifically looking for 8th Avenue being able to transfer to the or at Chambers or Canal and the other lines at various stations before that. 

Adding to what I wrote in the last post:

 

Late night Option #2:  runs 207-Lefferts (in place of the north of 168), runs 34th Street-Penn Station to Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park during such hours.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Again, it's simply a compromise as noted.  No need to connect dots, it's simply a concession to give Lefferts residents something in return for losing most express service. 

It's neither a compromise nor a concession. Late night service is NOT the issue here. Day time service is.

[Trainmaster5]

What's the ridership like on the Rockaway Park Branch these days? It used to be fairly dead going that way, especially overnight. I'm on a tablet with a shakey Wi-Fi connection so I can't easily get the station stats on Lefferts, Rock Park, and Mott Avenue.

[CenSin]

It's neither a compromise nor a concession. Late night service is NOT the issue here. Day time service is.

I’ve been waiting for someone to say it. Yes.

 

Why would a service change affecting the daytime ridership be compensated for by giving something to the nighttime ridership?

 

Why is compensation even necessary given that it is a net increase in service for all the stations from Grant Avenue to Lefferts Boulevard?

[Wallyhorse]

It's neither a compromise nor a concession. Late night service is NOT the issue here. Day time service is.

Yes, and daytime service would actually increase on the Lefferts line (as well as Rockaway) in this format since you would have a full-run of trains going there along with (in my format) a limited number of peak-direction trains to/from Lefferts in rush hours.  That is most important.  The concern is, some may just look as taking away service even if they actually are gaining service with twice as many trains as trains because of losing their one-seat express ride.  That's why eliminating the late-night shuttle to me is important to throw them a bone (with the side benefit of Fulton Street riders getting possibly double late-night local service) either by:

 

Extending the late nights to Lefferts

 

OR

 

Having the become 24/7 to Lefferts and extended late nights to 207 while late nights, the is truncated to 34th-Penn Station

 

OR

 

Having the run to both Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park late nights from 207 and the run Lefferts to Canal Street late nights.

 

That might make it so there isn't a big fight about the going to Lefferts. 

[P3F]

What's the ridership like on the Rockaway Park Branch these days? It used to be fairly dead going that way, especially overnight. I'm on a tablet with a shakey Wi-Fi connection so I can't easily get the station stats on Lefferts, Rock Park, and Mott Avenue.

Average weekday ridership in 2015, with rank:

 

Far Rockaway - 4,989 (297 out of 421)

B 25 Street - 1,861 (402 out of 421)

B 36 Street - 936 (416 out of 421)

B 44 Street - 624 (418 out of 421)

B 60 Street - 2,501 (387 out of 421)

B 67 Street - 2,407 (390 out of 421)

 

Far Rockaway Branch Total: 13,318 average weekday riders

 

Rockaway Park - 747 (417 out of 421)

B 105 Street - 305 (421 out of 421)

B 98 Street - 608 (419 out of 421)

B 90 Street - 946 (415 out of 421)

 

Rockaway Park Branch Total: 2,606 average weekday riders

 

Broad Channel - 310 (420 out of 421)

Howard Beach - 3,059 (368 out of 421)

N Conduit Avenue - 1,181 (412 out of 421)

Aqueduct Racetrack - 1,711 (405 out of 421)

 

South of Rockaway Boulevard Total: 22,185 average weekday riders

 

Lefferts Boulevard - 7,732 (201 out of 421)

111 Street - 2,727 (379 out of 421)

104 Street - 1,890 (400 out of 421)

 

East of Rockaway Boulevard Total: 12,349 average weekday riders

[CenSin]

Yes, and daytime service would actually increase on the Lefferts line (as well as Rockaway) in this format since you would have a full-run of trains going there along with (in my format) a limited number of peak-direction trains to/from Lefferts in rush hours.  That is most important.  The concern is, some may just look as taking away service even if they actually are gaining service with twice as many trains as trains because of losing their one-seat express ride.  That's why eliminating the late-night shuttle to me is important to throw them a bone (with the side benefit of Fulton Street riders getting possibly double late-night local service) either by:

 

Extending the late nights to Lefferts

 

OR

 

Having the become 24/7 to Lefferts and extended late nights to 207 while late nights, the is truncated to 34th-Penn Station

 

OR

 

Having the run to both Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park late nights from 207 and the run Lefferts to Canal Street late nights.

 

That might make it so there isn't a big fight about the going to Lefferts.

You missed the point of the question.

 

Why would a service change affecting the daytime ridership be compensated for by giving something to the nighttime ridership?

 

Why is compensation even necessary given that it is a net increase in service for all the stations from Grant Avenue to Lefferts Boulevard?

 

 

Please, do connect the dots for us—in excruciating detail.

 

Premise A ∴ B ∴ C ∴ … ∴ X ∴ Y ∴ Conclusion Z

(∴ is the symbol for “therefore.”)

 

Again, it's simply a compromise as noted.  No need to connect dots, it's simply a concession to give Lefferts residents something in return for losing most express service.

The dots must be connected to enlighten everyone on how your specific proposal out of many possible proposals is the best one.

 

Analogy to your proposal:

Suppose a pol took away a senior care center and gave the community a playground in its place. The neighborhood demographic is comprised mostly of aging seniors… how would this playground placate the community in any way?

[Wallyhorse]

You missed the point of the question.

 

 

The dots must be connected to enlighten everyone on how your specific proposal out of many possible proposals is the best one.

 

Analogy to your proposal:

Suppose a pol took away a senior care center and gave the community a playground in its place. The neighborhood demographic is comprised mostly of aging seniors… how would this playground placate the community in any way?

Since you insist:

 

1. There is a loss of express service on Lefferts with the exclusively serving the Rockaways since the would become the Lefferts Line.

 

2. Many such people also have been unhappy for years if coming home late or going to work in the late night hours (or very early in the morning) having to change trains somewhere between Euclid and Rockaway Boulevard if going to Lefferts.

 

3. You placate the bulk of the people who travel in rush hour by adding a limited number of trains running in the peak direction to and from Lefferts.  Not perfect, but it does enough to calm the loss of their one-seat ride to Manhattan (even though they would actually see twice as much service with the running to Manhattan, albeit via local and if they really want the being able to switch anywhere between Rockaway Boulevard and Euclid Avenue on the same platform (cross-platform at Euclid).

 

4. You throw Lefferts residents a bone by giving them a 24/7 one-seat ride to Manhattan (even if it is a truncated one in late-night hours that one gets them to where they can transfer to other lines if you run the to Canal Street only in the late-night hours since if you're going to Midtown you can actually switch to the or at Canal or other lines at Jay-Metrotech, Fulton and Chambers-Park Place and PATH at Chambers).  

 

That I suspect would do enough to placate those on Lefferts, especially if they realize they are getting twice as much service AND a limited number of rush-hour trains and a 24/7 one-seat ride to Manhattan in exchange for allowing the to replace the to Lefferts and the going to The Rockaways (other than some rush-hour service) exclusively.