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  
Lawrence St

Why does split service on the (A) work but won't on other lines?

Recommended Posts

How come split service between Lefferts Blvd and Far Rockaway work's so well on the (A) yet it can't work on other lines (I.e like (N) to 96th and Astoria)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

How come split service between Lefferts Blvd and Far Rockaway work's so well on the (A) yet it can't work on other lines (I.e like (N) to 96th and Astoria)?

You're assuming that it works. It doesn't. Have you seen the headway at parts of the day. Parts of the Far Rockaway segment now sees services every 30 minutes.

One delay anywhere along CPW, 8 Avenue or Fulton, and trains on the branches are delayed, leading to bunching and less frequent service overall. When (A) trains can't go over the bridge, the whole schedule goes out the window. The worst part is being at a Rockaway station already, and not knowing when service will resume.

 

The only reason it works "so well" is because the Liberty Avenue riders don't want locals, so the MTA can just distribute the service on the (A) however they feel like.

Edited by BM5 via Woodhaven
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Much of nobody on any transit forum would be talking about running (C)'s to Lefferts, if branching on the (A) is this profound practice.....

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

You're assuming that it works. It doesn't. Have you seen the headway at parts of the day. Parts of the Far Rockaway segment now sees services every 30 minutes.

One delay anywhere along CPW, 8 Avenue or Fulton, and trains on the branches are delayed, leading to bunching and less frequent service overall. When (A) trains can't go over the bridge, the whole schedule goes out the window. The worst part is being at a Rockaway station already, and not knowing when service will resume.

 

The only reason it works "so well" is because the Liberty Avenue riders don't want locals, so the MTA can just distribute the service on the (A) however they feel like.

Regarding the bridge, wasn't that the reason why the Rockaway Park Beach Branch became abandoned?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

You're assuming that it works. It doesn't. Have you seen the headway at parts of the day. Parts of the Far Rockaway segment now sees services every 30 minutes.

One delay anywhere along CPW, 8 Avenue or Fulton, and trains on the branches are delayed, leading to bunching and less frequent service overall. When (A) trains can't go over the bridge, the whole schedule goes out the window. The worst part is being at a Rockaway station already, and not knowing when service will resume.

Railroad frequency combined with NYC subway unreliability… great recipe we got here. It should be a model for all other services. /s

  • LMAO! 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CenSin said:

Railroad frequency combined with NYC subway unreliability… great recipe we got here. It should be a model for all other services. /s

What's really depressing is that there are segments of the SEPTA Regional Rail system (an actual railroad) with better rush hour frequency than the Rockaways

  • LMAO! 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my idea i know the debate of having the (A) concentrate on the rockaways is gonna make those people on liberty ave angry in the idea of ending split branching they gonna have to bite the bullet, also the (N)  branching is only rush hours only what 5 trains maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, BreeddekalbL said:

In my idea i know the debate of having the (A) concentrate on the rockaways is gonna make those people on liberty ave angry in the idea of ending split branching they gonna have to bite the bullet, also the (N)  branching is only rush hours only what 5 trains maybe?

Every other trunk line has two Express services to one local except 8th Av. 

So placate Ozone Park: (K) express from Lefferts to somewhere before 59th St; (A) express to Far Rockaway, and send 2 trains to Far Rock for every 1 to Lefferts.

giphy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Deucey said:


So placate Ozone Park: (K) express from Lefferts to somewhere before 59th St; (A) express to Far Rockaway, and send 2 trains to Far Rock for every 1 to Lefferts.

And where will this (K) originate from??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, LGA Link N train said:

And where will this (K) originate from??

giphy.gif

2 hours ago, Deucey said:

Every other trunk line has two Express services to one local except 8th Av. 

So placate Ozone Park: (K) express from Lefferts to somewhere before 59th St; (A) express to Far Rockaway, and send 2 trains to Far Rock for every 1 to Lefferts.

 

Fuh, let it run to Queensboro and turn around like (G) used to.

  • Thanks 1
  • LMAO! 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Deucey said:

Every other trunk line has two Express services to one local except 8th Av. 

Except 6th av, Broadway, and QBL. 

 

10 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

What's really depressing is that there are segments of the SEPTA Regional Rail system (an actual railroad) with better rush hour frequency than the Rockaways

The question shouldn't just be frequency, it should be % seated load. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, itmaybeokay said:

Except 6th av, Broadway, and QBL. 

 

The question shouldn't just be frequency, it should be % seated load. 

Well, if you have low frequency services, chances are that % seated load isn't gonna be high.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Well, if you have low frequency services, chances are that % seated load isn't gonna be high.

You're missing my point I think 

uguqFGV.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, itmaybeokay said:

You're missing my point I think 

***Picture***

 

You quoted an example that refers to the frequency of service, stating that seated loads should be considered. That suggests considering existing ridership in order to manage frequency of service, instead of just comparing frequencies with one another, and rockaways ridership as it is isn't high (but neither is it anemic). That only tells a part of the story, because the rockaways is an entirely different animal compared to the examples in the graph. First off, more service could be provided into the rockaways. There's only about 3-4 trains for most of the day.

Frequency plays a part in influencing ridership patterns out there too.  Not a lot of people will be willing to wait 20-30 minutes for a train when they can hop on the bus to Jamaica, Elmhurst, of Brooklyn College, and get a faster ride into Manhattan, all with more frequent service. Furthermore, no one in Manhattan (and parts of Brooklyn) wants to play the guessing game to see if they just missed an (A) to Far Rockaway.

 

 

Edited by BM5 via Woodhaven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

You quoted an example that refers to the frequency of service, stating that seated loads should be considered. That suggests considering existing ridership in order to manage frequency of service, instead of just comparing frequencies with one another. That only tells a part of the story, because the rockaways is an entirely different animal compared to the examples in the graph. First off, more service could be provided into the rockaways. There's only about 3-4 trains for most of the day.

Rockaways ridership isn't large (but it isn't anything to ignore either), due to the headways out on the branches.  No one is gonna be waiting 20-30 minutes for a train when they can hop on the bus to Jamaica, Elmhurst, of Brooklyn College, and get a faster ride into Manhattan, all with more frequent service. Furthermore, no one in Manhattan (and parts of Brooklyn) wants to play the guessing game to see if they just missed an (A) to Far Rockaway.

 

 

1) Nobody has to play the guessing game with subway-time available through the whole system. 

2) 20 minutes should be the absolute longest time between trains even in the dead of night - I and the guidelines agree with this. 

But no, I'm not in favor of increasing service to add trains someplace that the existing frequency of rush hour trains means damn near everyone gets to sit down. We have far, far bigger problems. 

"Saying add more trains and you'll get more passengers" is a theoretically valid point - I've said that about the G, but there and here priority falls behind issues restraining capacity on already overcapacity lines. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, itmaybeokay said:

1) Nobody has to play the guessing game with subway-time available through the whole system. 

2) 20 minutes should be the absolute longest time between trains even in the dead of night - I and the guidelines agree with this. 

But no, I'm not in favor of increasing service to add trains someplace that the existing frequency of rush hour trains means damn near everyone gets to sit down. We have far, far bigger problems. 

"Saying add more trains and you'll get more passengers" is a theoretically valid point - I've said that about the G, but there and here priority falls behind issues restraining capacity on already overcapacity lines. 

1) And that will only make less people resort to using said less-frequent option. 

2) Except the (A) runs every 30 minutes out there at certain parts of the day (before the late night period), so that violates the guidelines. Ridership during rush hour and evening periods are pretty decent despite the relatively crap headways. If you're on the Rockaway Park segment, forget it. You wouldn't want to do deal with potentially missing your connection to the (A). You don't think these patterns influence riding behavior and limit potential ridership? 

Yeah, trains at capacity have their problems, but we can't also not ignore everyone else on the outside, because many are also taking the trains into these congested zones.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

1) And that will only make less people resort to using said less-frequent option. 

2) Except the (A) runs every 30 minutes out there at certain parts of the day (before the late night period), so that violates the guidelines. Ridership during rush hour and evening periods are pretty decent despite the relatively crap headways. If you're on the Rockaway Park segment, forget it. You wouldn't want to do deal with potentially missing your connection to the (A). You don't think these patterns influence riding behavior and limit potential ridership? 

Yeah, trains at capacity have their problems, but we can't also not ignore everyone else on the outside, because many are also taking the trains into these congested zones.

 

 

I don't know why subway-time would somehow turn people away from the service. I feel like, it would let people know exactly when the train bound for the branch they want was coming, so they would feel better than an indefinite wait? 

I looked over the schedule including the S - I don't see the 30 minute headway portion but, I didn't pour over it for very long. 

 

Anyway - We'll have to agree to disagree - personally I don't think that increasing headways just so trains are more frequent is the way to go. Headway should be determined by needed capacity, but that's just my opinion. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, itmaybeokay said:

I don't know why subway-time would somehow turn people away from the service. I feel like, it would let people know exactly when the train bound for the branch they want was coming, so they would feel better than an indefinite wait? 

I looked over the schedule including the S - I don't see the 30 minute headway portion but, I didn't pour over it for very long. 

 

Anyway - We'll have to agree to disagree - personally I don't think that increasing headways just so trains are more frequent is the way to go. Headway should be determined by needed capacity, but that's just my opinion. 

Nitpick: Increasing headways is decreasing service frequency. 
Otherwise, I agree. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, itmaybeokay said:

I don't know why subway-time would somehow turn people away from the service. I feel like, it would let people know exactly when the train bound for the branch they want was coming, so they would feel better than an indefinite wait? 

I looked over the schedule including the S - I don't see the 30 minute headway portion but, I didn't pour over it for very long. 

 

Anyway - We'll have to agree to disagree - personally I don't think that increasing headways just so trains are more frequent is the way to go. Headway should be determined by needed capacity, but that's just my opinion. 

If people know how atrocious headways can be, then why bother even entering at said stop. 

 

The 30 minute headways exist towards Manhattan in the evening. 

I'm not saying double service, but make the service levels reasonable enough for people to use it. This doesn't even take into account how unreliable the (A) can be either. You may not agree, but just consider it: would you use a rather unreliable train running every 15-20 minutes, or would you use a somewhat reliable bus running every 8 minutes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What get's me annoyed is the Rockaway Park segment of the Rockaway Line, where service isn't as frequent as it should be. I believe that the Rockaway Park Shuttle should be extended to Rockaway Blvd at all times with trains every 15 minutes instead of every 30.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/4/2018 at 6:07 PM, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

 

 

 

The 30 minute headways exist towards Manhattan in the evening. 

 

 

There is exactly ONE 30-minute interval just before midnight leaving Far Rockaway. It is preceded by a 26-minute interval and a 24-minute interval.

In the same period there are 24-, 25- and 28-minute intervals on the Lefferts branch.

While I agree these should all be reduced to 20, it is wrong to state there are 30-minute intervals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Italianstallion said:

There is exactly ONE 30-minute interval just before midnight leaving Far Rockaway. It is preceded by a 26-minute interval and a 24-minute interval.

In the same period there are 24-, 25- and 28-minute intervals on the Lefferts branch.

While I agree these should all be reduced to 20, it is wrong to state there are 30-minute intervals.

There are two. 11:02 to 11:32, and then 12:02 (at the top of the schedule).

Also, you're only looking at the weekday schedule. Take a closer look at the Sunday schedule as well. After 10 PM, the headways are half-hourly until 12:02 AM Monday morning. So I'm not wrong in saying that.

Edited by BM5 via Woodhaven

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.