Personal Jerome <4> Express Pilot Study

[Lawrence St]

Greetings!

So I have been doing my own little pilot study on the Jerome Express. As you know, the , and all have some of the longest local segments in the Bronx. In this thread I will talk about my findings on how a Jerome Express can work, and would like opinions.

AM RUSH:
5 Manhattan-bound trains will run express from Woodlawn to 125th St, stopping at Moshulu Parkway, Burnside Avenue, 149th St and 125th St. Trips designated as BG will end at Bowling Green, and a two  trips to Flatbush Av will instead run to Utica Av to replace service. These trips will save an average of 13 minutes for commuters, and serve high ridership stations such as Woodlawn, Moshulu and Burnside Av. These trips are:
7:46 AM --> BG
7:59 AM
8:08 AM --> BG
8:19 AM
8:29 AM --> BG

PM RUSH

Only 3 Bronx-bound trains will run express, starting from Bowling Green and ending at Woodlawn. These trips are:

4:06 PM

4:49 PM

5:07 PM.

[Lex]

That only skips most of the ridership...

If you said these were additions to the schedule, it would be somewhat more palatable, but it's clear that they're not. Considering how biased Brooklyn ridership is toward Lexington Avenue, the last thing we should be doing is leaning into reducing it (and Nostrand Avenue service, unless  trains will somehow fill those  slots, at which point we've instead robbed everyone at all stations between Franklin Avenue and New Lots Avenue).

[Tericoid]

Maybe you could walk a few blocks and take the D express and transfer to the 4 at Yankee Stadium?

[Lawrence St]

3 hours ago, Lex said:

That only skips most of the ridership...

If you said these were additions to the schedule, it would be somewhat more palatable, but it's clear that they're not. Considering how biased Brooklyn ridership is toward Lexington Avenue, the last thing we should be doing is leaning into reducing it (and Nostrand Avenue service, unless  trains will somehow fill those  slots, at which point we've instead robbed everyone at all stations between Franklin Avenue and New Lots Avenue).

The problem with additions to the schedule is that 138th St is a major bottleneck.

[B35 via Church]

There's a greater demand for the in Brooklyn, compared to that of the .... If you have to stub 's at Bowling Green for the sake of running exp. service along Jerome, then I can't say it's all that worth it.... I'd rather have all 's running to Brooklyn, over coming up with some scheme to placate Jerome riders in the fashion that you're suggesting...

[Lawrence St]

17 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

There's a greater demand for the in Brooklyn, compared to that of the .... If you have to stub 's at Bowling Green for the sake of running exp. service along Jerome, then I can't say it's all that worth it.... I'd rather have all 's running to Brooklyn, over coming up with some scheme to placate Jerome riders in the fashion that you're suggesting...

I see. Any suggestions on how we can do it without having a major bottleneck at Rogers Junction?

[Lex]

27 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

I see. Any suggestions on how we can do it without having a major bottleneck at Rogers Junction?

For one, redesign the damn thing (hell, I'd go so far as to say the Eastern Parkway Line from Franklin Avenue to its end, especially since local trains sometimes turn at Utica Avenue).

[Around the Horn]

5 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

 If you have to stub 's at Bowling Green for the sake of running exp. service along Jerome, then I can't say it's all that worth it...

Ideally NO trains should be turning at Bowling Green but that's a whole other discussion.

[B35 via Church]

13 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

Ideally NO trains should be turning at Bowling Green but that's a whole other discussion.

Yeah, Bowling Green isn't an ideal terminal.... At the same time, what's he suggesting AFAIC is a slap in the face - It's a poor trade-off system-wide to opt to cut back whole TPH on the 4 to/from Brooklyn (esp. during peak times) so that some amount of Bronxites can save 'x' amount of minutes on their commute....

Just to be crystal, I'm not arguing from the vantage point that nothing should terminate at Bowling Green realistically..... While it involves Bowling Green, I'm arguing from the vantage point that Brooklyn service on the 4 should not be some sort of sacrificial lamb for Jerome express service (petty or not, IDC if it's one train; he's suggesting three)...

[Jemorie]

You proposed this on Facebook a little while ago and it got shot down. But obviously you won't give up.

Also, what does your "personal pilot study" have anything to do with the Brooklyn end of the  line?

[Lawrence St]

7 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Yeah, Bowling Green isn't an ideal terminal.... At the same time, what's he suggesting AFAIC is a slap in the face - It's a poor trade-off system-wide to opt to cut back whole TPH on the 4 to/from Brooklyn (esp. during peak times) so that some amount of Bronxites can save 'x' amount of minutes on their commute....

Just to be crystal, I'm not arguing from the vantage point that nothing should terminate at Bowling Green realistically..... While it involves Bowling Green, I'm arguing from the vantage point that Brooklyn service on the 4 should not be some sort of sacrificial lamb for Jerome express service (petty or not, IDC if it's one train; he's suggesting three)...

That's why I suggested rerouting certain few trips from Flatbush to Utica. But if we were to ADD more trips, you overload 138th St and Roger's Junction.

[Jemorie]

2 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

That's why I suggested rerouting certain few trips from Flatbush to Utica. But if we were to ADD more trips, you overload 138th St and Roger's Junction.

You do realize you can already select the existing  trips for that useless express service along Jerome that you endlessly keep on proposing right? Check the  timetable.

Ending some trains at Bowling Green will cause delays for through Brooklyn service and terminating some more s at Utica causes more confusion and reduces the number of trains per hour on the Nostrand Av corridor because those trains are needed back up from Flatbush as s or returning s.

Edited December 1, 2019 by Jemorie

[T to Dyre Avenue]

18 hours ago, Jemorie said:

You proposed this on Facebook a little while ago and it got shot down. But obviously you won't give up.

Also, what does your "personal pilot study" have anything to do with the Brooklyn end of the  line?

Didn’t Transit already do two trial periods of running a  express in The Bronx, neither of which was successful? 

12 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

That's why I suggested rerouting certain few trips from Flatbush to Utica. But if we were to ADD more trips, you overload 138th St and Roger's Junction.

Yes it’s possible that you would overload 138th and Rogers with more  trips. That would be another problem with doing a Bronx  express.

The bigger problem with doing the express is that a sizable amount of  riders at the skipped stations would see a cut in service ( express in Brooklyn, anyone?). The  is a shorter, more straight route through The Bronx than, say, the , and its ridership is more evenly spread out. That’s why the express on the  works out well on that line and why it wouldn’t work so well on the .

[Jemorie]

33 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Didn’t Transit already do two trial periods of running a  express in The Bronx, neither of which was successful? 

Yes it’s possible that you would overload 138th and Rogers with more  trips. That would be another problem with doing a Bronx  express.

The bigger problem with doing the express is that a sizable amount of  riders at the skipped stations would see a cut in service ( express in Brooklyn, anyone?). The  is a shorter, more straight route through The Bronx than, say, the , and its ridership is more evenly spread out. That’s why the express on the  works out well on that line and why it wouldn’t work so well on the .

First, that is not what I meant. I’m just saying that @Lawrence St tends to lack a lot of common sense in his posts...

I mean he does not even know what “additional  trips” he’s talking about...just look at the timetable or the Trip Planner. Entering Grand Central, there’s a total of 15  trains in the 8:00 a.m. hour every Mon-Fri. Same with the . You cannot physically run a train more than every 2 minutes apart. Combined with the current design of Rogers Av Jct, that pretty much limits capacity on the Lex Av Exp even further.

He knows the  is already an express for most of its route, interacts with the  for most of its route, and the Rogers Av Jct requires the latter to switch from express to local to the Nostrand Av corridor S/B and vice-versa N/B. So obviously therefore, you can’t add any additional trips to the  line during the “peak of the peak”. Even if he does during the other times, there is going to be held ups near Bowling Green since part of his “personal pilot study” involves him short turning some s at Bowling Green and some existing  trips rerouted from Flatbush to Utica to make up service. All he had to do was just pick whatever existing  trips he wants for that useless Bronx express run. That is all he had to do.

Your third paragraph pretty much summarizes the whole point everyone here has been making this whole time in this thread btw.

Edited December 1, 2019 by Jemorie

[Jemorie]

On 11/29/2019 at 3:46 PM, Tericoid said:

Maybe you could walk a few blocks and take the D express and transfer to the 4 at Yankee Stadium?

Even the  is a better candidate for a Bronx express and its rush hour headways are every 6 minutes. From Fordham Rd to W 4 St, the  skips a total of 16 stops. And anyone who needs Bway-Lafayette St/Bleecker St can take the  straight there rather than take the  and changing for the  at 14 St-Union Sq.

Edited December 1, 2019 by Jemorie

[CenSin]

2 hours ago, Jemorie said:

Even the  is a better candidate for a Bronx express and its rush hour headways are every 6 minutes. From Fordham Rd to W 4 St, the  skips a total of 16 stops. And anyone who needs Bway-Lafayette St/Bleecker St can take the  straight there rather than take the  and changing for the  at 14 St-Union Sq.

In Manhattan, they serve totally different markets. There is no shared station between the and at any point in Manhattan. There are 2 opportunities for a transfer: one is in the Bronx; and the other is in Brooklyn.

[Lawrence St]

2 minutes ago, CenSin said:

In Manhattan, they serve totally different markets. There is no shared station between the and at any point in Manhattan. There are 2 opportunities for a transfer: one is in the Bronx; and the other is in Brooklyn.

That, and the dosen't serve downtown Manhattan.

[Jemorie]

1 hour ago, CenSin said:

In Manhattan, they serve totally different markets. There is no shared station between the and at any point in Manhattan. There are 2 opportunities for a transfer: one is in the Bronx; and the other is in Brooklyn.

Fair enough. But in the Bronx, they are literally a block or two away from each other. Those who need East Harlem, the Upper East Side, East Midtown, and Lower Manhattan, will take the . Everyone else will take the . Obviously, nobody will take the  since it is a full Grand Concourse/Central Park West local unless they don't really have a choice or are traveling from a local stop to another local stop (looking at you Grand Concourse local stations, disregarding Central Park West, however).

1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

That, and the doesn't serve downtown Manhattan.

Your personal pilot study still holds no weight whatsoever and @T to Dyre Avenue pretty much hit the nail on the nose. The  has a straight-shot on Jerome Av in the Bronx and skips a total of 14 stops in Manhattan (15 if you include the 138-GC bypass). I think anyone on Jerome Av would pretty much consider that quite fast, particularly those traveling to Brooklyn Bridge-City Hall, Fulton St, Wall St, and Bowling Green. From Woodlawn to 125 St, if there are no delays and timed-signals, the  takes a half-hour or so.

Despite its slow Manhattan-Brooklyn express speed from time to time and being behind schedule from time to time, which is caused by another train ahead or congestion caused in Brooklyn by Rogers Av Jct, the  is generally one of the most frequent lines in the system.

Edited December 1, 2019 by Jemorie

[Around the Horn]

Stops served:

Burnside Av: 3,198,218

Woodlawn: 2,160,859

total: 5,359,077

Stops skipped:

167 Street: 2,933,140

170 Street: 2,562,443

Mount Eden Av: 1,652,407

176 Street: 1,803,691

183 Street: 1,821,457

Fordham Road: 3,321,215

Kingsbridge Road: 2,783,082

Bedford Park Blvd: 1,575,555

Moshulu Parkway: 2,531,607

total: 20,984,597

I think it's pretty clear why this is a bad idea.

[R68OnBroadway]

Has there ever been some sort of plan where the  terminates at Burnside and the  runs local north of Burnside? (Not advocating for this, just wondering if this was ever proposed out of pure curiosity.) 

[RR503]

56 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said:

Has there ever been some sort of plan where the  terminates at Burnside and the  runs local north of Burnside? (Not advocating for this, just wondering if this was ever proposed out of pure curiosity.) 

You'd end up with Parkchester disease, or a f**kton of ugly crossing moves on a high-volume core corridor. The switches are also not at all set up for it -- PM rush northbound expresses continuing to Woodlawn and PM rush locals relaying south would essentially be single-tracking through Burnside unless you long relayed to north of Kingsbridge. 

8 hours ago, CenSin said:

In Manhattan, they serve totally different markets. There is no shared station between the and at any point in Manhattan. There are 2 opportunities for a transfer: one is in the Bronx; and the other is in Brooklyn.

They're much more similar than one would think. Between the  transfer at 7/53 and the fact that Lex and 6th are only about 2,000 feet apart south of 42, the  can compete for a lot of the s markets if it had the frequency and reliability. Even today, someone travelling from Kingsbridge  to 51 St  is equally well off doing  ->59 ->  as they are walking to the , taking to the  and walking down to 51.

[CenSin]

20 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said:

Has there ever been some sort of plan where the  terminates at Burnside and the  runs local north of Burnside? (Not advocating for this, just wondering if this was ever proposed out of pure curiosity.) 

4 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

Stops served:

Burnside Av: 3,198,218

Woodlawn: 2,160,859

total: 5,359,077

Stops skipped:

167 Street: 2,933,140

170 Street: 2,562,443

Mount Eden Av: 1,652,407

176 Street: 1,803,691

183 Street: 1,821,457

Fordham Road: 3,321,215

Kingsbridge Road: 2,783,082

Bedford Park Blvd: 1,575,555

Moshulu Parkway: 2,531,607

total: 20,984,597

I think it's pretty clear why this is a bad idea.

Here are the revised numbers if stopping at all the stations north of Burnside Avenue (-style):

• Stops served (total ridership of 17,391,993😞
  • Woodlawn: 2,160,859
  • Moshulu Parkway: 2,531,607
  • Bedford Park Blvd: 1,575,555
  • Kingsbridge Road: 2,783,082
  • Fordham Road: 3,321,215
  • 183 Street: 1,821,457
  • Burnside Av: 3,198,218
• Stops skipped (total ridership of 8,951,681😞
  • 176 Street: 1,803,691
  • Mount Eden Av: 1,652,407
  • 170 Street: 2,562,443
  • 167 Street: 2,933,140

So for the local stations, the expected wait time is now doubled to 4 minutes (from 2 minutes) to provide a flat time savings of 3 minutes to the upper segment of the line. So an additional 298,389 manhours of waiting for those 4 stations in exchange for saving 869,599 manhours of commuting for the other 7 stations. It looks nice on paper, but I don’t ride the trains up there, so I wouldn’t know how it would pan out if implemented.

That said, the isn’t that bad among some of the other express routes:

• : 0 stops to the first express station (Crown Heights–Utica Avenue)
• <E>: 0 stops to the first express station (Jamaica–179 Street)
• : 1 stop to the first express station (Sheepshead Bay)
• : 1 stop to the first express station (Sutphin Boulevard–Archer Avenue–JFK Airport)
• : 1 stop to the first express station (Mets–Willets Point)
• : 2 stops to the first express station (Jamaica–Van Wyck)
• : 3 stops to the first express station (Fordham Road)
• : 4 stops to the first express station (57 Street–7 Avenue)
• : 5 stops to the first express station (168 Street)
• : 5 stops to the first express station (East 180 Street)
• : 6 stops to the first express station (96 Street)
• : 6 stops to the first express station (Parkchester)
• : 7 stops to the first express station (Franklin Avenue)
• : 7 stops to the first express station (Euclid Avenue)
• : 7 stops to the first express station (Forest Hills–71 Avenue)
• : 9 stops to the first express station (East 180 Street)
• : 10 stops to the first express station (59 Street)
• <A>: 11 stops to the first express station (Euclid Avenue)
• : 12 stops to the first express station (149 Street–Grand Concourse)
• : 12 stops to the first express station (Church Avenue)
• : 13 stops to the first express station (Euclid Avenue)
• : 13 stops to the first express station (36 Street)
• : 19 stops to the first express station (Chambers Street)
• : 19 stops to the first express station (DeKalb Avenue)
• : 22 stops to the first express station (Chambers Street)
• : 24 stops to the first express station (96 Street)

[Lawrence St]

5 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

Stops served:

Burnside Av: 3,198,218

Woodlawn: 2,160,859

total: 5,359,077

Stops skipped:

167 Street: 2,933,140

170 Street: 2,562,443

Mount Eden Av: 1,652,407

176 Street: 1,803,691

183 Street: 1,821,457

Fordham Road: 3,321,215

Kingsbridge Road: 2,783,082

Bedford Park Blvd: 1,575,555

Moshulu Parkway: 2,531,607

total: 20,984,597

I think it's pretty clear why this is a bad idea.

Moshulu Pkwy isn't a skipped stop, this pilot is the same routing pattern that they did for the last pilot.

[Lex]

51 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

Moshulu Pkwy isn't a skipped stop, this pilot is the same routing pattern that they did for the last pilot.

Great, Mosholu Parkway isn't skipped. That changes very little, especially since the ridership at several of the skipped stations still comes out higher.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

19 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

Stops served:

Burnside Av: 3,198,218

Woodlawn: 2,160,859

total: 5,359,077

Stops skipped:

167 Street: 2,933,140

170 Street: 2,562,443

Mount Eden Av: 1,652,407

176 Street: 1,803,691

183 Street: 1,821,457

Fordham Road: 3,321,215

Kingsbridge Road: 2,783,082

Bedford Park Blvd: 1,575,555

Moshulu Parkway: 2,531,607

total: 20,984,597

I think it's pretty clear why this is a bad idea.

Wow 😳! That’s way more than riders than I thought who would be losing service with a  express. Even if the  also stopped at Mosholu and Bedford Park, that’s still a fraction of the whole  line’s ridership north of 149th. 

15 hours ago, R68OnBroadway said:

Has there ever been some sort of plan where the  terminates at Burnside and the  runs local north of Burnside? (Not advocating for this, just wondering if this was ever proposed out of pure curiosity.) 

I thought that’s why they did for at least one of the two express trials. Something along the lines of the current  operations. But I might be wrong about that. Though that’s probably the closest thing to a realistic option for any kind of Jerome express service, given the ridership at the stations south of Burnside, including 161st, which has the highest ridership in all of The Bronx.

Edited December 2, 2019 by T to Dyre Avenue