Calvin Posted April 27, 2020 Share #1001 Posted April 27, 2020 Giving a notice: Today is the last day trains will head over along the Second Av line to 96 St on the . The connection from Broadway on the to either Hewes St or Lorimer St on the will go on until May 31st. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted April 27, 2020 Share #1002 Posted April 27, 2020 9 hours ago, Calvin said: Giving a notice: Today is the last day trains will head over along the Second Av line to 96 St on the . The connection from Broadway on the to either Hewes St or Lorimer St on the will go on until May 31st. The latter connection should be permanent. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallyhorse Posted April 27, 2020 Share #1003 Posted April 27, 2020 13 hours ago, Calvin said: Giving a notice: Today is the last day trains will head over along the Second Av line to 96 St on the . The connection from Broadway on the to either Hewes St or Lorimer St on the will go on until May 31st. Personally, I would have made the to 96th/2nd or 145th/8th on weekends a permanent change, mainly so it serves 6th Avenue. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7-express Posted April 27, 2020 Share #1004 Posted April 27, 2020 Take a virtual ride in the new and improved Canarsie tubes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonologue Posted April 27, 2020 Share #1005 Posted April 27, 2020 3 hours ago, Union Tpke said: The latter connection should be permanent. Is there any real reason why they don't? Same with providing a transfer with the and lines with Atlantic Av. Is it a revenue thing? Does it really cost them that much? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted April 27, 2020 Share #1006 Posted April 27, 2020 3 minutes ago, EvilMonologue said: Is there any real reason why they don't? Same with providing a transfer with the and lines with Atlantic Av. Is it a revenue thing? Does it really cost them that much? They claim they will lose too much money. See this: http://web.mta.info/nyct/service/G_LineReview_7_10_13.pdf 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGA Link N Train Posted April 27, 2020 Share #1007 Posted April 27, 2020 1 hour ago, Union Tpke said: They claim they will lose too much money. See this: http://web.mta.info/nyct/service/G_LineReview_7_10_13.pdf I feel like the needs to update the Line Review because a lot has changed with the Line between 2013 and the present day. If anything, we can all agree on the following: - Trains need to be lengthened to at least 480'. Preferably, it should use 8 car R-160's or R-179's for the upcoming CBTC upgrades, and for compatibility with Queens Blvd CBTC just in case an Train needs to be rerouted. - Build a Hewes Street/Broadway Transfer should be a serious consideration given its success during the Project. (A Union Avenue station along the and to consolidate Hewes Street and Loimer Street would be more preferable though I'm not trying to get ahead of myself). 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted April 27, 2020 Share #1008 Posted April 27, 2020 3 hours ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said: I feel like the needs to update the Line Review because a lot has changed with the Line between 2013 and the present day. If anything, we can all agree on the following: - Trains need to be lengthened to at least 480'. Preferably, it should use 8 car R-160's or R-179's for the upcoming CBTC upgrades, and for compatibility with Queens Blvd CBTC just in case an Train needs to be rerouted. - Build a Hewes Street/Broadway Transfer should be a serious consideration given its success during the Project. (A Union Avenue station along the and to consolidate Hewes Street and Loimer Street would be more preferable though I'm not trying to get ahead of myself). They never reviewed any lines other than the A/C, F, G, and L, and you want them to go back to the G? They said they might do one for the R after SAS, but never did end up doing it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGA Link N Train Posted April 27, 2020 Share #1009 Posted April 27, 2020 11 minutes ago, Union Tpke said: They never reviewed any lines other than the A/C, F, G, and L, and you want them to go back to the G? They said they might do one for the R after SAS, but never did end up doing it. Just to update it, that's it. Well that's unfortunate, the is a line that's in need of improvement. Arguably, more than any other line. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3F Posted April 27, 2020 Share #1010 Posted April 27, 2020 6 hours ago, Union Tpke said: They claim they will lose too much money. See this: http://web.mta.info/nyct/service/G_LineReview_7_10_13.pdf The revenue loss is severe because the way the does OOS transfers is quite open ended - swipe in literally anywhere, then get a free transfer at the OOS transfer station. Once OMNY comes around, I think they could make the OOS transfers a bit more closed in. Let's give Atlantic Av as an example: within fare control, have a "tap-out" scanner, with a big sign saying "Tap here to get a free out of system transfer at Lafayette Av or Fulton St " (with a map showing how to get to those stations). Then, the user gets 30 minutes after tapping out to tap in at the transfer station, so that the system can't be abused. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallyhorse Posted April 27, 2020 Share #1011 Posted April 27, 2020 16 minutes ago, P3F said: The revenue loss is severe because the way the does OOS transfers is quite open ended - swipe in literally anywhere, then get a free transfer at the OOS transfer station. Once OMNY comes around, I think they could make the OOS transfers a bit more closed in. Let's give Atlantic Av as an example: within fare control, have a "tap-out" scanner, with a big sign saying "Tap here to get a free out of system transfer at Lafayette Av or Fulton St " (with a map showing how to get to those stations). Then, the user gets 30 minutes after tapping out to tap in at the transfer station, so that the system can't be abused. That would be a good way of doing it and cut down on abuse. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Collin Posted April 27, 2020 Share #1012 Posted April 27, 2020 I like that idea. It would need to be clearly signed or people would forget to tap out and then get angry when they have to pay an extra fare. There are other places where such a transfer could be useful like 207th Street on the and , Queens Plaza and Queensboro Plaza, and 21st Street and Hunterspoint Avenue. These are areas where I don't think the cost of building an in-system transfer is justified, but it would expand the usefulness of the system to have the out of system transfer. There are still 2 areas where I think there should be an in-system transfer, like Hewes/Lorimer and Broadway, and Junius Street and Livonia Avenue. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted April 27, 2020 Share #1013 Posted April 27, 2020 1 hour ago, P3F said: The revenue loss is severe because the way the does OOS transfers is quite open ended - swipe in literally anywhere, then get a free transfer at the OOS transfer station. Once OMNY comes around, I think they could make the OOS transfers a bit more closed in. Let's give Atlantic Av as an example: within fare control, have a "tap-out" scanner, with a big sign saying "Tap here to get a free out of system transfer at Lafayette Av or Fulton St " (with a map showing how to get to those stations). Then, the user gets 30 minutes after tapping out to tap in at the transfer station, so that the system can't be abused. Just like the pink readers in London. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGA Link N Train Posted April 27, 2020 Share #1014 Posted April 27, 2020 1 hour ago, Collin said: Hewes/Lorimer and Broadway, and Junius Street and Livonia Avenue. The is already working on a Livonia-Junius Tranfsfer since they made the free transfer permanent. I made another post above regarding Hewes/Loimer and Broadway. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewFlyer 230 Posted May 3, 2020 Share #1015 Posted May 3, 2020 On 4/27/2020 at 9:22 AM, Wallyhorse said: Personally, I would have made the to 96th/2nd or 145th/8th on weekends a permanent change, mainly so it serves 6th Avenue. I wish they would keep that service alive somehow. That one seat ride came so in handy and I’ve noticed that trains would have lots of people on them through Midtown. I noticed according to the MTA’s statistics ridership increased decently at every single stop the stops at along 6th Ave. I know a lot of those people were former train riders but I’m sure this encouraged other people to ride the . The and the are simply not enough, and the can be so infrequent as it is. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Collin Posted May 3, 2020 Share #1016 Posted May 3, 2020 6th Avenue is the only Manhattan trunk line that doesn't run 3 services on weekends, so it definitely makes sense to have the go further into Manhattan on weekends. The question is does 2nd Ave need the extra service? While I don't think 2nd Ave desperately needs more weekend service, it could be beneficial since the has to serve the line alone. On weekdays there are select and trains. It would be better if the could just terminate at 57th Street or 47th-50th, so 2nd Avenue is the only logical place to send it. 145th and 8th would mean there's 4 services on CPW which I don't think they want. If CPW needs more service, then weekend service can be increased. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewFlyer 230 Posted May 3, 2020 Share #1017 Posted May 3, 2020 24 minutes ago, Collin said: 6th Avenue is the only Manhattan trunk line that doesn't run 3 services on weekends, so it definitely makes sense to have the go further into Manhattan on weekends. The question is does 2nd Ave need the extra service? While I don't think 2nd Ave desperately needs more weekend service, it could be beneficial since the has to serve the line alone. On weekdays there are select and trains. It would be better if the could just terminate at 57th Street or 47th-50th, so 2nd Avenue is the only logical place to send it. 145th and 8th would mean there's 4 services on CPW which I don't think they want. If CPW needs more service, then weekend service can be increased. On CPW they need to make the local on the weekends. The by itself is just a pain sometimes to take. It’s annoying missing a train on CPW (on the weekends) because you are guaranteed to wait 12-15 minutes for a train that will be crowded. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawrence St Posted May 3, 2020 Share #1018 Posted May 3, 2020 2 hours ago, Collin said: 6th Avenue is the only Manhattan trunk line that doesn't run 3 services on weekends, so it definitely makes sense to have the go further into Manhattan on weekends. The question is does 2nd Ave need the extra service? While I don't think 2nd Ave desperately needs more weekend service, it could be beneficial since the has to serve the line alone. On weekdays there are select and trains. It would be better if the could just terminate at 57th Street or 47th-50th, so 2nd Avenue is the only logical place to send it. 145th and 8th would mean there's 4 services on CPW which I don't think they want. If CPW needs more service, then weekend service can be increased. If 57th St was made as a 4 track terminal like 57th St-7th Av, it would've made a great terminal for the . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallyhorse Posted May 4, 2020 Share #1019 Posted May 4, 2020 (edited) On 5/3/2020 at 3:07 AM, Lawrence St said: If 57th St was made as a 4 track terminal like 57th St-7th Av, it would've made a great terminal for the . I don't think 57th-6th was ever intended to be a long-term terminal. The lengthy delays in getting 63rd Street done were why that happened. Edited May 4, 2020 by Wallyhorse 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted May 4, 2020 Share #1020 Posted May 4, 2020 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Wallyhorse said: I don't think 57th-6th was ever intended to be a long-term terminal. The lengthy delays in getting 63rd Street done were why that happened. It was initially a short-term terminal for additional Sixth Avenue service through the Chrystie Street Connection and the new Sixth Avenue express tracks. Before the extension to 57th was built, there was a provision in the tunnel for a northward expansion. Edited May 4, 2020 by Union Tpke 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.