Jump to content

Fix & Fortify - 14th Street (L Train) Tunnels Closure


Lance

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, RR503 said:

My big question about that is where those other 2tph of (M) service are going. The same doc quite clearly stated 14tph over the bridge, which is, well, not equal to 12. My guess (and hope): D5 at Queens Plaza, but that’s by no means something I’m in any way certain of. 

Here's the key info from the document:

  • AM peak
    • (M) 14 tph NB (up from 9), 14 tph SB (up from 9, 12 tph QBL)
      • (J) local 10 tph (down from 12) - I wouldn't be surprised to see the (Z) cancelled 
    • (R) 10 tph NB, 8 tph SB (down from 10)
    • The (R) is unaffected, minus 2 fewer trains from Forest Hills. Of the 5 additional (M) tph per direction, only 3 from Forest Hills are accounted for. Assuming 1 additional NB train to QBL, presumably the excess are running to / from 96 St, since the (M) is going there on weekends IIRC and the short turn would reduce the necessary fleet requirement.
  • PM peak
    • (M) 14 tph SB (up from 8), 14 tph NB (up from 😎
      • (J) local 10 tph
    • (R) 10 tph SB, 10 tph NB
    • It's reasonable to assume that 2 additional tph will run to/from Forest Hills, with the remaining 4 tph going to/from 96 St.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I can see a 143 borrowed from the (L) pop up on the (M), but the likelihood of a 32 from the (J) is pretty remote. I think the plan is to keep that line as new tech as possible, which is why the (M) gets first dibs on the A1s while the (J) gets literally everything else. Also, I don't see any of that happening with the upcoming weekend closures, but rather the main shutdown where (M) service is boosted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
20 minutes ago, Coney Island Av said:

Well guys, it's officially confirmed for the shutdown that: 

The (M) won't get just 50 additional cars, but rather 5 TPH! It will be increased from 9 TPH to 14 TPH! Sadly, the (J)(Z) will be reduced to 10 TPH, and the (R) to 8 TPH in order to make room for the 14 TPH (M). Keep in mind there's an important distinction to note between an additional five trains per hour or just five trains added to the line. 

The (G) will have some trains terminate at Bedford-Nostrand and will be extended to 18 Av! 12 TPH would run from 18 Av/Church, while 3 TPH would run from Bedford-Nostrand to Court Square. 

The (C) and (G) will be full-length, as confirmed in the past. 

Need proof? Well here you go!

http://web.mta.info/mta/news/notices/pdf/Canarsie_Env_Assessment_ FINAL.pdf

Bringing this over from the R179 Discussion thread...

On 8/3/2018 at 2:58 PM, Caelestor said:

Here's the key info from the document:

  • AM peak
    • (M) 14 tph NB (up from 9), 14 tph SB (up from 9, 12 tph QBL)
      • (J) local 10 tph (down from 12) - I wouldn't be surprised to see the (Z) cancelled 
    • (R) 10 tph NB, 8 tph SB (down from 10)
    • The (R) is unaffected, minus 2 fewer trains from Forest Hills. Of the 5 additional (M) tph per direction, only 3 from Forest Hills are accounted for. Assuming 1 additional NB train to QBL, presumably the excess are running to / from 96 St, since the (M) is going there on weekends IIRC and the short turn would reduce the necessary fleet requirement.
  • PM peak
    • (M) 14 tph SB (up from 8), 14 tph NB (up from 😎
      • (J) local 10 tph
    • (R) 10 tph SB, 10 tph NB
    • It's reasonable to assume that 2 additional tph will run to/from Forest Hills, with the remaining 4 tph going to/from 96 St.

 

...I’m thinking they should just suspend the (Z) for the duration of the shutdown. Who’s going to want to wait 12 minutes during rush hour if they just miss a train at the “skip” stations? Just give every station on the (J) line the full 10 tph. 

As for the (M) and (R), it seems that 96th and 2nd is on its way to becoming the B-Division version of New Lots Avenue during rush hours, with the rerouting of two of the five extra (M) trains and two of the existing (R) trains per hour being sent there. It’ll be giving “Zoo Lots” a run for its money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Bringing this over from the R179 Discussion thread...

...I’m thinking they should just suspend the (Z) for the duration of the shutdown. Who’s going to want to wait 12 minutes during rush hour if they just miss a train at the “skip” stations? Just give every station on the (J) line the full 10 tph. 

As for the (M) and (R), it seems that 96th and 2nd is on its way to becoming the B-Division version of New Lots Avenue during rush hours, with the rerouting of two of the five extra (M) trains and two of the existing (R) trains per hour being sent there. It’ll be giving “Zoo Lots” a run for its money.

That or something like the 99 Williamsburg service changes. (Z) service between Broadway Junction and Jamaica.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The (J)(Z) going local sucks. Like T to Dyre Avenue said, it makes you wonder what's the purpose of skip-stop between Broadway Junction and Sutphin Blvd in the first place since they'll only be skipping at most 4-5 stops instead of the current 9-10 stops.

By the way, T to Dyre Avenue, it'll only be an extra 2 minute wait for the skip-stop stations. But I do agree that 12 minute headways, in terms of mathematics, equals one less train an hour. There also needs to be 13 skip-stop trains leaving Broad Street between 4:50 and 5:50 in the afternoon instead of the current 11.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Jemorie said:

The (J)(Z) going local sucks. Like T to Dyre Avenue said, it makes you wonder what's the purpose of skip-stop between Broadway Junction and Sutphin Blvd in the first place since they'll only be skipping at most 4-5 stops instead of the current 9-10 stops.

By the way, T to Dyre Avenue, it'll only be an extra 2 minute wait for the skip-stop stations. But I do agree that 12 minute headways, in terms of mathematics, equals one less train an hour. There also needs to be 13 skip-stop trains leaving Broad Street between 4:50 and 5:50 in the afternoon instead of the current 11.

In fact, median wait will only go up by one minute...but that isn’t an argument. See, if we cut another train, then median wait increases by 1.5 mins, and another increases it by 2.5. It’s easy to justify cuts like this when you look at such small numbers, but if you do, then you’ve just allowed me to cut service from 6tph to 3tph. The Jamaica line is hands down the worst served area of the system — only the Rockaways, which don’t bost the same ridership density, can give it a run for its money. Subjecting people along the line to even longer wait times on top of commutes that are already among the lengthiest in NYC seems unjust, to say nothing of being bad development policy. As you may have guessed by now, I think skip-stop needs to be killed entirely for the shutdown — if not in the long term, too. Once the burden on the (M) is reduced, I’d love to see some of that capacity shifted to the (J) —a much more sustainable way of reducing commute times, IMO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, RR503 said:

In fact, median wait will only go up by one minute...but that isn’t an argument. See, if we cut another train, then median wait increases by 1.5 mins, and another increases it by 2.5. It’s easy to justify cuts like this when you look at such small numbers, but if you do, then you’ve just allowed me to cut service from 6tph to 3tph. The Jamaica line is hands down the worst served area of the system — only the Rockaways, which don’t bost the same ridership density, can give it a run for its money. Subjecting people along the line to even longer wait times on top of commutes that are already among the lengthiest in NYC seems unjust, to say nothing of being bad development policy. As you may have guessed by now, I think skip-stop needs to be killed entirely for the shutdown — if not in the long term, too. Once the burden on the (M) is reduced, I’d love to see some of that capacity shifted to the (J) —a much more sustainable way of reducing commute times, IMO. 

A few years back there was an OP study to have trains from JC run local to Crescent Street, express via the local to Broadway Jct, and then express, with locals coming from Crescent like the old BMT service pattern? Do you think this is a good idea?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Union Tpke said:

A few years back there was an OP study to have trains from JC run local to Crescent Street, express via the local to Broadway Jct, and then express, with locals coming from Crescent like the old BMT service pattern? Do you think this is a good idea?

Most of the Jamaica Line ridership lies west of Broadway Junction. The optimal service pattern in such a case is to have an "inner zone" local service (short turns at Broadway Junction) which we'll call the (J) and an "outer zone" express service (to Jamaica) which we'll call the (Z). Post (L) shutdown, I think the optimal service over the Williamsburg Bridge / Jamaica Line is 8 tph on each of the (J)(M)(Z). That said, the main impediment to operating such a frequent service without delays is the flat junction at Myrtle Ave. 

19 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Bringing this over from the R179 Discussion thread...

...I’m thinking they should just suspend the (Z) for the duration of the shutdown. Who’s going to want to wait 12 minutes during rush hour if they just miss a train at the “skip” stations? Just give every station on the (J) line the full 10 tph. 

As for the (M) and (R), it seems that 96th and 2nd is on its way to becoming the B-Division version of New Lots Avenue during rush hours, with the rerouting of two of the five extra (M) trains and two of the existing (R) trains per hour being sent there. It’ll be giving “Zoo Lots” a run for its money.

The problem with skip-stop service in general is that only the riders at the very end of the line truly benefit from the intermediate skipped stops, but I don't think there are enough Jamaica riders compared to the riders at the stops with half service. In general, riders value decreases in wait time more than decreases in trip time. Since skip-stop service is definitely getting cancelled west of Broadway Junction, I'd remove it east of that stop too. Were a train to suddenly be disabled, the other 9 tph could substitute more easily than 4 tph under a skip-stop service plan.

The (R) really shouldn't be running to 96 St because the merge from the Broadway local tracks to the express tracks is just going to delay service even more. Send those trains to Astoria and reroute more (N) trains to 96 St.

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/5/2018 at 6:49 PM, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Bringing this over from the R179 Discussion thread...

...I’m thinking they should just suspend the (Z) for the duration of the shutdown. Who’s going to want to wait 12 minutes during rush hour if they just miss a train at the “skip” stations? Just give every station on the (J) line the full 10 tph. 

As for the (M) and (R), it seems that 96th and 2nd is on its way to becoming the B-Division version of New Lots Avenue during rush hours, with the rerouting of two of the five extra (M) trains and two of the existing (R) trains per hour being sent there. It’ll be giving “Zoo Lots” a run for its money.

If I'm correct, the (Z) will be local between Broadway Junction and Marcy Avenue, like how it was with the M shutdown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/5/2018 at 6:49 PM, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Bringing this over from the R179 Discussion thread...

...I’m thinking they should just suspend the (Z) for the duration of the shutdown. Who’s going to want to wait 12 minutes during rush hour if they just miss a train at the “skip” stations? Just give every station on the (J) line the full 10 tph. 

As for the (M) and (R), it seems that 96th and 2nd is on its way to becoming the B-Division version of New Lots Avenue during rush hours, with the rerouting of two of the five extra (M) trains and two of the existing (R) trains per hour being sent there. It’ll be giving “Zoo Lots” a run for its money.

As said before, I would:

Keep the (R) as is.

Have ALL of the extra (M) trains, re-labled as (T) running to 96th/2nd.

Creating a new OOS transfer between Fulton Street on the (G) and the Atlantic-Barclays Complex (for the (2)(3)(4)(5)(B)(D)(N)(Q)(R)) and push riders as much as possible to use that transfer or the transfer between the (G) and the (A) and (C) at Hoyt-Schermerhorn.  

Court Square has the makings of a disaster in my view, especially if anything goes wrong with the Steinway, 53rd or 63rd Street tunnels.  At least with Atlantic-Barclays there are numerous tunnels there so that kind of problem isn't quite as bad, especially with additional transfers north of Atlantic-Barclays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/6/2018 at 2:50 PM, Caelestor said:

Most of the Jamaica Line ridership lies west of Broadway Junction. The optimal service pattern in such a case is to have an "inner zone" local service (short turns at Broadway Junction) which we'll call the (J) and an "outer zone" express service (to Jamaica) which we'll call the (Z). Post (L) shutdown, I think the optimal service over the Williamsburg Bridge / Jamaica Line is 8 tph on each of the (J)(M)(Z). That said, the main impediment to operating such a frequent service without delays is the flat junction at Myrtle Ave. 

The problem with skip-stop service in general is that only the riders at the very end of the line truly benefit from the intermediate skipped stops, but I don't think there are enough Jamaica riders compared to the riders at the stops with half service. In general, riders value decreases in wait time more than decreases in trip time. Since skip-stop service is definitely getting cancelled west of Broadway Junction, I'd remove it east of that stop too. Were a train to suddenly be disabled, the other 9 tph could substitute more easily than 4 tph under a skip-stop service plan.

The (R) really shouldn't be running to 96 St because the merge from the Broadway local tracks to the express tracks is just going to delay service even more. Send those trains to Astoria and reroute more (N) trains to 96 St.

  

Fully agreed here. Running the extra (M) trains plus the displaced (R) trains alongside the (Q) will turn 96th St into “Zoo Lots.” 

Myrtle-Broadway’s flat junction really does mess with being able to run a more ideal service pattern on the Jamaica El.

Personally, I like @Union Tpke‘s suggestion to run trains to/from Jamaica Center local to Crescent St, then express on the local between there and Broadway Junction, followed by express on the middle track after Broadway Jct, with locals starting at Crescent. In theory, it’s probably the next best thing to build a bypass track straight down Jamaica Ave in Brooklyn by the cemeteries. In practice, however, it could be difficult to do. You’d have to schedule trains in clusters of two, with a local departing Crescent closely behind the express, so the express wouldn’t get stuck behind a local. It could work in the am rush. Pm rush is a different story because you’d have to factor in the merges with the (M) further down the line.

19 hours ago, MTA Bus said:

If I'm correct, the (Z) will be local between Broadway Junction and Marcy Avenue, like how it was with the M shutdown.

That I’m fine with. The stations in between Broadway Junction and Myrtle are much busier than than those on the other side of  Broadway Jct and they will be even busier with the (L) tunnels out of commission. I just don’t think 12-minute rush hour headways are justified on the (J)(Z) east of Broadway Jct. 

6 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

As said before, I would:

Keep the (R) as is.

Have ALL of the extra (M) trains, re-labled as (T) running to 96th/2nd.

Creating a new OOS transfer between Fulton Street on the (G) and the Atlantic-Barclays Complex (for the (2)(3)(4)(5)(B)(D)(N)(Q)(R)) and push riders as much as possible to use that transfer or the transfer between the (G) and the (A) and (C) at Hoyt-Schermerhorn.  

Court Square has the makings of a disaster in my view, especially if anything goes wrong with the Steinway, 53rd or 63rd Street tunnels.  At least with Atlantic-Barclays there are numerous tunnels there so that kind of problem isn't quite as bad, especially with additional transfers north of Atlantic-Barclays.

You know, for someone who talks a lot about growing up in New York and your experiences riding the subway, you really don’t seem to understand the way people ride the subways here. Do you really think you can “push” displaced (L) riders “as much as possible” to ride the (G) all the way down to Fulton St and use an (overrated) out-of-system transfers to the already-crowded Atlantic-Barclays subways to head back up? Especially those whose destinations lie well north of 14th St? I don’t think so!

Edited by T to Dyre Avenue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure of the ridership numbers of today's Jamaica line from Queens to Broadway Junction so help me out here.  I've seen people denigrate the skip-stop service and I wonder if they're aware of the original reasoning it was instituted.  The 15 ran A/B service from 168th to Eastern Parkway and reversed it in the evening.  Think today's (J)(Z) trains.  The reasoning being that all stop service would be extremely delayed at the heavier ridership stations such as Sutphin-LIRR or Woodhaven Blvd. At Eastern Parkway those trains would then run express to Manhattan because local trains would start their runs there  , Atlantic Avenue,  or Rockaway Parkway station and be joined by the Myrtle-Chambers locals. It seems to me that the (J)(Z) ridership is getting shafted if the proposed plans I've seen are finalized. Perhaps I'm missing something here?  Maybe start some trains at Eastern Parkway and and let them run local to Marcy ? Carry on. 

Edited by Trainmaster5
Additional thought
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Trainmaster5 said:

I'm not sure of the ridership numbers of today's Jamaica line from Queens to Broadway Junction so help me out here.  I've seen people denigrate the skip-stop service and I wonder if they're aware of the original reasoning it was instituted.  The 15 ran A/B service from 168th to Eastern Parkway and reversed it in the evening.  Think today's (J)(Z) trains.  The reasoning being that all stop service would be extremely delayed at the heavier ridership stations such as Sutphin-LIRR or Woodhaven Blvd. At Eastern Parkway those trains would then run express to Manhattan because local trains would start their runs there  , Atlantic Avenue,  or Rockaway Parkway station and be joined by the Myrtle-Chambers locals. It seems to me that the (J)(Z) ridership is getting shafted if the proposed plans I've seen are finalized. Perhaps I'm missing something here?  Maybe start some trains at Eastern Parkway and and let them run local to Marcy ? Carry on. 

Brooklyn usage on the J/Z trumps that of Queens usage....

As for Queens riders on the line (generally speaking) - If they're not xferring over to B'way Junction for the (L) or the (A) / (C), they're too busy reverse commuting to Sutphin to catch the (E).....

Brooklyn riders are the ones riding to Manhattan directly to xfer to any of the trunk lines they need..... Halsey, Gates, Kosciuszko, man, all those areas are undergoing population growths.... We know Marcy & Myrtle have been heavyweights for the longest.... Hewes & Chauncey are really the only lightweight stops along Broadway - I mean, save for Woodhaven & anything east of 121st (not inclusive), those stops in Queens are, at best, on par with those two stops (Hewes, Chauncey), than any of the other stops in Brooklyn.....

The (J) b/w Alabama & 121st, population-wise, has rather stagnated....

Edited by B35 via Church
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/7/2018 at 6:43 PM, T to Dyre Avenue said:

You know, for someone who talks a lot about growing up in New York and your experiences riding the subway, you really don’t seem to understand the way people ride the subways here. Do you really think you can “push” displaced (L) riders “as much as possible” to ride the (G) all the way down to Fulton St and use an (overrated) out-of-system transfers to the already-crowded Atlantic-Barclays subways to head back up? Especially those whose destinations lie well north of 14th St? I don’t think so!

When I grew up in the '80s, that IS how we sometimes did it (without the OOS transfers of course).  

Court Square to me is a recipe for a disaster.  Some people are going to need to go there no matter what.

And there are enough people going to Lower Manhattan who can use either an OOS transfer between Fulton and Atlantic-Barclays OR the transfer between the (G) and (A) / (C) at Hoyt-Schermerhorn that those transfers should be encouraged as much as possible to cut down on people using Court Square.

It's too bad there isn't a suitable place to turn the (G) other than Court Square for this without messing up other lines as otherwise, it would be so the (G) can go to Queens Plaza and allow riders to transfer to the (R) there as well as (via an OOS transfer) the (N) and (Q) and reduce the reliance on Court Square.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Brooklyn usage on the J/Z trumps that of Queens usage....

As for Queens riders on the line (generally speaking) - If they're not xferring over to B'way Junction for the (L) or the (A) / (C), they're too busy reverse commuting to Sutphin to catch the (E).....

Brooklyn riders are the ones riding to Manhattan directly to xfer to any of the trunk lines they need..... Halsey, Gates, Kosciuszko, man, all those areas are undergoing population growths.... We know Marcy & Myrtle have been heavyweights for the longest.... Hewes & Chauncey are really the only lightweight stops along Broadway - I mean, save for Woodhaven & anything east of 121st (not inclusive), those stops in Queens are, at best, on par with those two stops (Hewes, Chauncey), than any of the other stops in Brooklyn.....

The (J) b/w Alabama & 121st, population-wise, has rather stagnated....

Thanks for the heads up. As far as those (J) riders bailing at B'way  Junction I've seen that pattern increase over the years too. I remember calling those stats about station usage bogus because of B'way Junction and the crowds xferring there. You're right about the population growth stagnating past Alabama toward121st. Bunch of knuckleheads under the Fulton St portion and those on the north side of Jamaica Ave ( Highland), let's just say they don't use the subway much any more. Kinda dead up there. Been trying to tell my folks who ran away from Bushwick 30+ years ago about the transformation over there . Carry on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

When I grew up in the '80s, that IS how we sometimes did it (without the OOS transfers of course).  

Court Square to me is a recipe for a disaster.  Some people are going to need to go there no matter what.

And there are enough people going to Lower Manhattan who can use either an OOS transfer between Fulton and Atlantic-Barclays OR the transfer between the (G) and (A) / (C) at Hoyt-Schermerhorn that those transfers should be encouraged as much as possible to cut down on people using Court Square.

It's too bad there isn't a suitable place to turn the (G) other than Court Square for this without messing up other lines as otherwise, it would be so the (G) can go to Queens Plaza and allow riders to transfer to the (R) there as well as (via an OOS transfer) the (N) and (Q) and reduce the reliance on Court Square.  

Reducing (M) frequencies at Court Square is certainly not a way to mitigate any foreseen disaster... With all the ridership there, the name of the game will be preserving crowd fluidity through service frequency. 

If you want to bring people south, you should advocate for those short turns at Bedford Nostrand to be extended to Church/18th. This needs to be an additive process, not a subtractive one. 

2 hours ago, Trainmaster5 said:

Thanks for the heads up. As far as those (J) riders bailing at B'way  Junction I've seen that pattern increase over the years too. I remember calling those stats about station usage bogus because of B'way Junction and the crowds xferring there. You're right about the population growth stagnating past Alabama toward121st. Bunch of knuckleheads under the Fulton St portion and those on the north side of Jamaica Ave ( Highland), let's just say they don't use the subway much any more. Kinda dead up there. Been trying to tell my folks who ran away from Bushwick 30+ years ago about the transformation over there . Carry on.

Indeed. I'd argue that given said area's excellent geology, it stands to be the next frontier in development -- provided good transit. Some sort of resuscitation of Bway Jct-Myrtle Express service would certainly help to that end, while also mitigating the tides of people who transfer to/from the narrow (J) platforms at the Junction. I'd also kill skip stop. Yes, when Jamaica was a bigger ridership draw than today, the pattern made more sense, but with Archer having killed the (J)'s convenience to the area, the bulk of line ridership -- from my observation -- comes from mid-line stations. And of course, with higher frequencies at those stations, development becomes an even more attractive proposition.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, RR503 said:

Reducing (M) frequencies at Court Square is certainly not a way to mitigate any foreseen disaster... With all the ridership there, the name of the game will be preserving crowd fluidity through service frequency. 

If you want to bring people south, you should advocate for those short turns at Bedford Nostrand to be extended to Church/18th. This needs to be an additive process, not a subtractive one. 

Indeed. I'd argue that given said area's excellent geology, it stands to be the next frontier in development -- provided good transit. Some sort of resuscitation of Bway Jct-Myrtle Express service would certainly help to that end, while also mitigating the tides of people who transfer to/from the narrow (J) platforms at the Junction. I'd also kill skip stop. Yes, when Jamaica was a bigger ridership draw than today, the pattern made more sense, but with Archer having killed the (J)'s convenience to the area, the bulk of line ridership -- from my observation -- comes from mid-line stations. And of course, with higher frequencies at those stations, development becomes an even more attractive proposition.  

I would have no short turns on the (G) at Bedford-Nostrand.  All trains would go to Church or 18th as I would do it in order to encourage people to head south instead of north as much as possible.

Agree with what you say about reviving the full Broadway express to Broadway Junction during peak hours on the (J)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

When I grew up in the '80s, that IS how we sometimes did it (without the OOS transfers of course).  

Court Square to me is a recipe for a disaster.  Some people are going to need to go there no matter what.

And there are enough people going to Lower Manhattan who can use either an OOS transfer between Fulton and Atlantic-Barclays OR the transfer between the (G) and (A) / (C) at Hoyt-Schermerhorn that those transfers should be encouraged as much as possible to cut down on people using Court Square.

It's too bad there isn't a suitable place to turn the (G) other than Court Square for this without messing up other lines as otherwise, it would be so the (G) can go to Queens Plaza and allow riders to transfer to the (R) there as well as (via an OOS transfer) the (N) and (Q) and reduce the reliance on Court Square.  

 

That transfer your talking about wally aint no simple transfer...Who you think in the winter time when its cold and icy and the summer in 100 degrees would  use that....I know i wouldnt.....Back in the 80's im definitely not useing that transfer...Might get mugged doing it at that time....:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

I would have no short turns on the (G) at Bedford-Nostrand.  All trains would go to Church or 18th as I would do it in order to encourage people to head south instead of north as much as possible.

Agree with what you say about reviving the full Broadway express to Broadway Junction during peak hours on the (J)

The problem with extending the short turn (G) trains to Church Av is because of the (F) . Only 24 (F)(G) trains can operate per hour between Bergen St and Church Av, the main issue being the slow merge of the (F). If you add more (G) trains you have to make more (F) trains express, which will not work for the Culver Local riders between Church Av and Bergen St, who need direct (F) service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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