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.
Eric B

Limited F express service coming to Brooklyn for rush hour !

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

So how do you explain the (B) ?

And how, exactly, does the (B) fit into this?

I'm specifically talking about a combination of service on two outer 4-track lines, a local/express pattern somewhat akin to a theoretical White Plains Road Express swap, and an overlap that was actually employed by the B44 during the early SBS days (with a few exceptions, buses from both ends would actually run from one end to a midpoint, then double back, as opposed to the current setup, which is more logical, as buses serving one end will serve the other, while buses starting at a midpoint will end at a midpoint).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 7/14/2019 at 11:05 AM, Lance said:

I'm not going to wade through the myriad of proposals and instead just touch upon the actual service change announcement. For those complaining about the extreme limitedness of the service, I'm surprised no one has realized that this is the intention. Transit knows this service will fail, which is exactly why they plan on implementing it as such. Few people if any are going to rearrange their schedules and commutes to catch one of the two inbound express trains during the AM rush or the outbound ones in the afternoons, because as we all know, railroad style scheduling does not work on the subway. Transit also knows that they cannot run additional express trains without screwing over Windsor Terrace, Gowanus and Carroll Gardens. When this inevitably fails due to low ridership similar to the Jerome pilot back in '09, Transit can "truthfully" say they tried, but cannot do much else without negatively impacting service elsewhere.

The enthusiasm of some posters never ceases to amaze me. If they would only stop,  take a deep breath and then look at reality I think they would see the big picture.  Any plans for new construction are DOA. New tunneling and interlockings appears to be fantasy IMO. I doubt that phase 2 of the SAS will ever be completed. I'm looking at these grandiose plans for the Nassau Street line and it appears that many people have overlooked the obvious. Those tracks and platforms were abandoned because the MTA deemed them unnecessary and a waste of money to maintain. Bergen lower is another location where the MTA doesn't see the need to rehab and re-open. When a few of us asked about the removal of the switches at Freeman St on the WPR line we were told that they were removed to save money,  period. Never mind the loss of operational flexibility.  Never mind that our old G.O.s took out service from Freeman to East 180 and buses were provided now a G.O. in that area means bus service from Third Avenue to East 180 instead . It's my opinion that many of the posts,  however well thought out,  will never be considered if they cost money or political capital. My subway posters should pay more attention to the Surface threads.  Those folks know the routine.  If it's not cost neutral  it's not happening.  Maybe someone should put a bug in Andrew's ear. He is the only person who can change that mantra.  My opinion.  Carry on.

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Trainmaster5 said:

My subway posters should pay more attention to the Surface threads.  Those folks know the routine.  If it's not cost neutral it's not happening.

What's never considered is that (so-called) cost neutrality represents the top of the proverbial totem pole.... It's put out there (not necessarily by you, but by the MTA & whoever else puts stock in it) as if it's the ultimate aim, when it is not.... If (or should I say, when) some service alteration of some sort ends up resulting in a fiscal savings, that's when the real success is achieved...

Fact of the matter is that there's just so many cuts (whether on the physical routes themselves or service levels) that the buses have underwent over the years, that you hardly see much of anyone in the bus section posting ideas anymore; esp. the outlandish ones..... For me, it's to the point I don't even want to discuss the ridership figures that just came out....

If, analogously speaking, trying to fix the bus network is like trying to piece together a jigsaw puzzle, then I'd say trying to fix the subway network is akin to untangling tangled wires.... All boils down to how "untangled" some believe the subway system to be over others on here, I suppose.... In any case, I've never said it (up until this point anyway), but ever since I started perusing transit forums (the first being RD/Straps), I have always gotten the sense that those that make subway proposals do so, for no other reason, except for the sake of experiencing a new & different service pattern - not for any benefit for any commuter whatsoever...

On ‎7‎/‎14‎/‎2019 at 11:05 AM, Lance said:

I'm not going to wade through the myriad of proposals and instead just touch upon the actual service change announcement. For those complaining about the extreme limitedness of the service, I'm surprised no one has realized that this is the intention. Transit knows this service will fail, which is exactly why they plan on implementing it as such. Few people if any are going to rearrange their schedules and commutes to catch one of the two inbound express trains during the AM rush or the outbound ones in the afternoons, because as we all know, railroad style scheduling does not work on the subway. Transit also knows that they cannot run additional express trains without screwing over Windsor Terrace, Gowanus and Carroll Gardens. When this inevitably fails due to low ridership similar to the Jerome pilot back in '09, Transit can "truthfully" say they tried, but cannot do much else without negatively impacting service elsewhere.

I've gotten used to dodging subway bullets.... If I see a post with a plethora of them, to be quite frank, I gloss right over it.... Whether fairly or unfairly, it's dismissed as some proposal discussion I want zero part of.....

Anyway, this bit reminds me of the (E) to/from 179th.... IIRC, it's only what, 3 trains each way or w/e..... Much of how many of any masses are (not) planning their commutes around that, is right; esp. for the PM rush....

Edited by B35 via Church
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, B35 via Church said:

Anyway, this bit reminds me of the (E) to/from 179th.... IIRC, it's only what, 3 trains each way or w/e..... Much of how many of any masses are (not) planning their commutes around that, is right; esp. for the PM rush....

Hell, if they could turn more trains at Jamaica Center, I seriously doubt those trains would even serve Hillside Avenue.

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.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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