Jump to content


Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Sign in to follow this  
Union Tpke

Frequency on Q to increase (SAS)

Recommended Posts

This is disgusting.  They're only doing this crap to serve the Upper East Side.  Before the (Q) ran via 2nd Avenue, service was crappy on the (Q) (the schedules may have said one thing, but the reality was another), and now they can suddenly pump up the frequencies.  

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ VG8: If the trains are crowded, shouldn't more service be added to that line?

 

@ Tonyboy515: It's in the opposite direction of the Brooklyn peak direction (the AM increase is towards Coney Island, and the PM increase is Manhattan-bound).

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ VG8: If the trains are crowded, shouldn't more service be added to that line?

 

The trains were crowded prior to SAS and they didn't give a crap.  Now suddenly that the runs via SAS, the service is MUCH better.... 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@vg8 Astoria (and sharing it with the N) limited the number of Q trains that could've been added. Trust me, Astoria can be a madhouse with trains literally in and out

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@vg8 Astoria (and sharing it with the N) limited the number of Q trains that could've been added. Trust me, Astoria can be a madhouse with trains literally in and out

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

Forget about added service.  I just always felt that the trains didn't come as frequently as the schedule said.  Now that the train runs via SAS, it seems to be a different story.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@vg8 Astoria (and sharing it with the N) limited the number of Q trains that could've been added. Trust me, Astoria can be a madhouse with trains literally in and out

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

 

exactly, not to mention the merge with the (N) and (R) at 34th, and the (N) again at Prince southbound or DeKalb northbound prior to the (W) coming back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is good to because by the time this happens, They'll have more cars since by then the R179 should officially be in service by then to free up more cars (Jamaica sends CIY more R160's while pitkin gives Jamaica more R46's) similar to what they did in January.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with VG8... people complained about poor headways and got "we can't do anything to fix it" but now that the UES gets a new line more trains are to be sent there to relieve crush loads?

 

What about (A) riders north of 125 that have to wait for three trains to pass before they can fit, or (C) riders in Brooklyn waiting 8-10 minutes during AM peak and still having to contort awkwardly to fit in an overcrowded train?

 

Why does UES get more equipment when they have an alternative three blocks away ( (6) ) when others who could use more service don't?

 

Gubernatorial campaign donors live on the UES.

Edited by Deucey
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with VG8... people complained about poor headways and got "we can't do anything to fix it" but now that the UES gets a new line more trains are to be sent there to relieve crush loads?

 

What about (A) riders north of 125 that have to wait for three trains to pass before they can fit, or (C) riders in Brooklyn waiting 8-10 minutes during AM peak and still having to contort awkwardly to fit in an overcrowded train?

 

Why does UES get more equipment when they have an alternative three blocks away ( (6) ) when others who could use more service don't?

 

Gubernatorial campaign donors live on the UES.

How does this all fit in with car availability with Yards to be assigned? Did CI have a few trains to spare for the (Q)? Are there enough cars to go around for the (C) or the (A) per say? Just wondering

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about (A) riders north of 125 that have to wait for three trains to pass before they can fit

 

where are you getting this from? I never see anyone being left behind at 207th, Dyckman, 190th, 181st and 175th on the (A), not even in the morning

Edited by Jemorie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with VG8... people complained about poor headways and got "we can't do anything to fix it" but now that the UES gets a new line more trains are to be sent there to relieve crush loads?

 

What about (A) riders north of 125 that have to wait for three trains to pass before they can fit, or (C) riders in Brooklyn waiting 8-10 minutes during AM peak and still having to contort awkwardly to fit in an overcrowded train?

 

Why does UES get more equipment when they have an alternative three blocks away ( (6) ) when others who could use more service don't?

 

Gubernatorial campaign donors live on the UES.

 

1. The B division is currently in the midst of a car shortage that probably won't be fully fixed until the R211s get here.

 

2. The 2010-2016  (N)  (Q)  (R) service pattern with all those insane merges and the (N)  (Q) sharing a terminal with limited capacity prevented the  (MTA) from increasing service on any of those three lines.

 

Not everything is a conspiracy, and these two additional trips are not just for the UES.

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, the UES also added a bunch of new riders, and as the only train traveling along the SAS route, it makes sense that it'd have lower headways than when it went to Astoria, a route shared with the (N)...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does this all fit in with car availability with Yards to be assigned? Did CI have a few trains to spare for the (Q)? Are there enough cars to go around for the (C) or the (A) per say? Just wondering

 

The B division is in the midst of a car shortage because they got scrap happy in 2010 when the R160 options came in.

Edited by Around the Horn
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This schedule change seems to primarily benifit SAS riders, and reverse commute riders. Going into Midtown AM, going to 96/2 PM. Trains from Brighton are equally crowded and I could say the MTA didn't do nothing about that till SAS. Weekend service was even worse on the (Q) before SAS. Everyone along Broadway knows that on the weekend, it's better just to take the local instead of waiting for the (Q). Now it's much better... MTA certainly are picky when it comes to where service improvements should happen (def not buses)

Edited by Mtatransit
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

where are you getting this from? I never see anyone being left behind at 207th, Dyckman, 190th, 181st and 175th on the (A), not even in the morning

I can tell you don't ride the (A) or used to north of 125th but during the rush as early as 6 or even 630 the (A) is light between 207th & 168th then from 168 south good luck getting on at 145th and 125th. Especially the southend of the (A) in the morning the exits/entrances are near the front like 207th, 168th, 145th....

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. The B division is currently in the midst of a car shortage that probably won't be fully fixed until the R211s get here.

 

2. The 2010-2016 (N)(Q)(R) service pattern with all those insane merges and the (N)(Q) sharing a terminal with limited capacity prevented the (MTA) from increasing service on any of those three lines.

 

Not everything is a conspiracy, and these two additional trips are not just for the UES.

No one said it was a conspiracy. In fact there is no conspiracy. What I was getting at was how the (MTA) didn't give a damn about the crowded trains prior to the (Q) running via 2nd Avenue. Looking at the schedule, the (Q) was supposed to run at least every 10 minutes, yet I found myself waiting much longer than that numerous times. Now I notice that since the line runs via 2nd Avenue, the trains are more in line with the schedule. There's something to be said about that especially given the times that I was taking the (Q) train (early Saturday mornings going to Brooklyn from Midtown - no excuse why service should be so poor since there shouldn't be train traffic, etc). Not a conspiracy. Just more like the (MTA) not giving a damn about the outer boroughs.

This schedule change seems to primarily benifit SAS riders, and reverse commute riders. Going into Midtown AM, going to 96/2 PM. Trains from Brighton are equally crowded and I could say the MTA didn't do nothing about that till SAS. Weekend service was even worse on the (Q) before SAS. Everyone along Broadway knows that on the weekend, it's better just to take the local instead of waiting for the (Q). Now it's much better... MTA certainly are picky when it comes to where service improvements should happen (def not buses)

You are saying exactly what I noticed taking the (Q) on weekends before it started running via 2nd Avenue. Trains were few and far in between despite what the schedule said. Wasn't always that way either. I remember not that long ago, the (Q) was much better on weekends. Edited by Via Garibaldi 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ VG8: If the trains are crowded, shouldn't more service be added to that line?

 

@ Tonyboy515: It's in the opposite direction of the Brooklyn peak direction (the AM increase is towards Coney Island, and the PM increase is Manhattan-bound).

Aaah, now I agree about that. There's literally no (Q) on the Coney Island side for at least 15 minutes. I'd rather use the B49 than the (Q) if I'm going there.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

where are you getting this from? I never see anyone being left behind at 207th, Dyckman, 190th, 181st and 175th on the (A), not even in the morning

Hah...well I was this morning.

I can tell you don't ride the (A) or used to north of 125th but during the rush as early as 6 or even 630 the (A) is light between 207th & 168th then from 168 south good luck getting on at 145th and 125th. Especially the southend of the (A) in the morning the exits/entrances are near the front like 207th, 168th, 145th....

Yeah 145 is crazy at the south end. And as for 207 to 168 it really picks up between about 7 and 8:30. I use 181 and it can get to the point where people don't fit onto the platform and have to wait on the staircases.
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one said it was a conspiracy. In fact there is no conspiracy. What I was getting at was how the (MTA) didn't give a damn about the crowded trains prior to the (Q) running via 2nd Avenue. Looking at the schedule, the (Q) was supposed to run at least every 10 minutes, yet I found myself waiting much longer than that numerous times. Now I notice that since the line runs via 2nd Avenue, the trains are more in line with the schedule. There's something to be said about that especially given the times that I was taking the (Q) train (early Saturday mornings going to Brooklyn from Midtown - no excuse why service should be so poor since there shouldn't be train traffic, etc). Not a conspiracy. Just more like the (MTA) not giving a damn about the outer boroughs.

You are saying exactly what I noticed taking the (Q) on weekends before it started running via 2nd Avenue. Trains were few and far in between despite what the schedule said. Wasn't always that way either. I remember not that long ago, the (Q) was much better on weekends.

 

Prior to the opening of SAS there were several factors hogging down the (Q) service. 1. The (N) had to merge with it not once, but twice. Just after Canal and before 42nd st. Astoria also regularly causes conga lines that we now see with the (W) being there.

 

We also have the metal happy, power sucking dekalb interlocking throwing hammers into the mix further minimizing the ability to increase service (it's one reason why B service isn't up to snuff with say the (A) headway wise along CPW)

 

On the weekends when the line was cutback to 57st you still had the (N) merging with it north of Canal

 

The (Q) now doesn't haven't to deal with those conga lines in Astoria because the terminal allows much faster arrival speeds and it also doesn't have to merge with the (N) at 42.

 

The demise of the (W) is probably what has caused service to seem irregular.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The increase is quite minor so I wouldn't make a big deal of it however I've always had the sense that the MTA shows favortism towards the UES. How in the wealthiest neighborhood in the country does every single subway and local bus service running through it have high frequencies? That doesn't sound right given the transportation culture in the US. The (4)(5) combine for 2 minute peak headways, the (6) has 2-3 minute peak headways, the M79, 86 and 96 all have peak headways under 5 minutes, the M15 SBS has 3 minute headways in the AM, M101/102/103 combine for good headways and you have the load of bus service along Madison/5th. With all of that the MTA still finds a way to throw in an extra (Q) in each direction to benefit UES commuters more than Brighton ones. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to go off-topic but, how was the Lexington Av line before the SAS (Q) line? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ VG8: If the trains are crowded, shouldn't more service be added to that line?

 

@ Tonyboy515: It's in the opposite direction of the Brooklyn peak direction (the AM increase is towards Coney Island, and the PM increase is Manhattan-bound).

 

 

The trains were crowded prior to SAS and they didn't give a crap.  Now suddenly that the runs via SAS, the service is MUCH better.... 

 

 

I'm with VG8... people complained about poor headways and got "we can't do anything to fix it" but now that the UES gets a new line more trains are to be sent there to relieve crush loads?

 

What about (A) riders north of 125 that have to wait for three trains to pass before they can fit, or (C) riders in Brooklyn waiting 8-10 minutes during AM peak and still having to contort awkwardly to fit in an overcrowded train?

 

Why does UES get more equipment when they have an alternative three blocks away ( (6) ) when others who could use more service don't?

 

Gubernatorial campaign donors live on the UES.

Welcome to the UES, arguably THE most densely populated area of the entire country.  This was supposed to take pressure off the (6), which I believe is the most overcrowded line of the entire system (as well as the (4) and (5) lines).

 

This is one of the reasons why I proposed the increase of (M) service actually being a split into (M) and (T), with the (T) going Metropolitan-96th/2nd as a 24/7 line (5 TPH Weekdays, 3 TPH Late Nights, 6-9 TPH Weekends depending on needs during the (L) shutdown). 

 

1. The B division is currently in the midst of a car shortage that probably won't be fully fixed until the R211s get here.

 

2. The 2010-2016  (N)  (Q)  (R) service pattern with all those insane merges and the (N)  (Q) sharing a terminal with limited capacity prevented the  MTA from increasing service on any of those three lines.

 

Not everything is a conspiracy, and these two additional trips are not just for the UES.

What hurt here was not realizing the R44s would need to be scrapped.  Had that not happened, then perhaps we would not be having this issue.

 

I mean, the UES also added a bunch of new riders, and as the only train traveling along the SAS route, it makes sense that it'd have lower headways than when it went to Astoria, a route shared with the (N)...

Another factor overlooked.  Previously, the (Q) was a supplement going north, now, its a main line.

 

The B division is in the midst of a car shortage because they got scrap happy in 2010 when the R160 options came in.

As noted above, that had more to do with the unexpected scrapping of the R44s and not keeping enough from the other car classes (R38s and R40s and R42s) to compensate for that).   If they had kept some of the other older classes to allow for the R44 scraping (or done a better job so they would NOT have had to scrap the R44s in the first place), then this likely is NOT an issue now. 

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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