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.
MysteriousBtrain

N.Y. Subway, Facing a $16 Billion Deficit, Plans for Deep Cuts

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, 67thAve said:

Part of that is because of the bad PR public transport gets regarding cleanliness and health (even before the pandemic). Government advice (not just in NY, but in other places domestically and internationally) has also stated that, in effect, public transit should be the "mobility of last resort", which makes the recovery process even more difficult.

Scaremongering doesn't particularly work well. Instead, what the MTA should be doing is reassure people through quality marketing (something which the agency is NOT good at) that subways and buses are indeed safe to ride....

I seriously doubt a germaphobe's reluctance to want to use public transit anymore after this whole crisis kicked off, had much to do with the MTA itself.... In saying that, I don't see where the MTA was engaging in any fear-mongering anyway.....

Regardless, I concur with the point at the end there; although they would be fighting a rather uphill battle with that.....

15 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

You must be out of your dam mind if you think you can run the (4) via Lexington Av Local full time.

As for an all local (A) & (2)...

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

You must be out of your dam mind if you think you can run the (4) via Lexington Av Local full time.

Meh, at least that means no one would want to ride it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

Meh, at least that means no one would want to ride it.

Well it's not something that I'd exactly advocate for, but it sure ODK3Ljb.gifeats the passenger service we have along the Lex overnights right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/21/2020 at 6:24 PM, Lawrence St said:

You must be out of your dam mind if you think you can run the (4) via Lexington Av Local full time.

It's not ideal.  The (5) in this would be shortened to Grand Central and would use there to turn.  If you can find a way to do that AND have the (4) run express, then by all means the (4) can remain an express. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The budget deficit is bigger any any paltry cuts we’re proposing here. The 2010 cuts only saved millions. The MTA is going to have to be much more creative than a few more line cuts beyond what it did in 2010. The attractiveness of public transportation can only diminish so much. The MTA has to cut carefully so that it cuts to save itself, not to kill itself.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

The budget deficit is bigger any any paltry cuts we’re proposing here. The 2010 cuts only saved millions. The MTA is going to have to be much more creative than a few more line cuts beyond what it did in 2010. The attractiveness of public transportation can only diminish so much. The MTA has to cut carefully so that it cuts to save itself, not to kill itself.

At this point I'm beginning to think it's a lost cause; I take one look at 2 Broadway and all I see is:

giphy.gif?cid=ecf05e47l1tytfqeo49fz2p0ra

 

  • LMAO! 3
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, R10 2952 said:

At this point I'm beginning to think it's a lost cause; I take one look at 2 Broadway and all I see is:

giphy.gif?cid=ecf05e47l1tytfqeo49fz2p0ra

 

That's something everyone on here can agree on. 

 

4 hours ago, CenSin said:

The budget deficit is bigger any any paltry cuts we’re proposing here. The 2010 cuts only saved millions. The MTA is going to have to be much more creative than a few more line cuts beyond what it did in 2010. The attractiveness of public transportation can only diminish so much. The MTA has to cut carefully so that it cuts to save itself, not to kill itself.

Don't know why, but for some reason, I see the possibility of OPTO practices coming to fruition in NYCT. I know the Union doesn't want that, but if its the only way to save the (MTA) then so be it. As far as overall service cuts going, I can see everything being reduced to 8-10 minutes (with a few exceptions), the (3), (B), (W) and (Z) (Skip Stop) all getting the axe. The (5) being cut back to Bowling Green, the (C)(M) and (R) getting their hours cut, the (D) and (N) becoming local in Manhattan (sans 6th Avenue between 34th Street and Grand). All short turn and reroutes being eliminated, dozens of bus routes eliminated. If these cuts happen, they're going to have to compensate in one way or another. At the very least, nothing is getting abandoned. 

Also, correct me if I'm wrong on this but the (MTA) needs to stop spending money on things they don't need.  ESI is a perfect example. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Don't know why, but for some reason, I see the possibility of OPTO practices coming to fruition in NYCT. I know the Union doesn't want that, but if its the only way to save the (MTA) then so be it. As far as overall service cuts going, I can see everything being reduced to 8-10 minutes (with a few exceptions), the (3), (B), (W) and (Z) (Skip Stop) all getting the axe. The (5) being cut back to Bowling Green, the (C)(M) and (R) getting their hours cut, the (D) and (N) becoming local in Manhattan (sans 6th Avenue between 34th Street and Grand). All short turn and reroutes being eliminated, dozens of bus routes eliminated. If these cuts happen, they're going to have to compensate in one way or another. At the very least, nothing is getting abandoned. 

Also, correct me if I'm wrong on this but the (MTA) needs to stop spending money on things they don't need.  ESI is a perfect example.

“…that’s just the tip of dis iceboiyg.” —Reverend Father Uncle Ruckus

I’m interested in knowing what’s swimming beneath the surface.

  • LMAO! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

That's something everyone on here can agree on. 

 

Don't know why, but for some reason, I see the possibility of OPTO practices coming to fruition in NYCT. I know the Union doesn't want that, but if its the only way to save the (MTA) then so be it. As far as overall service cuts going, I can see everything being reduced to 8-10 minutes (with a few exceptions), the (3), (B), (W) and (Z) (Skip Stop) all getting the axe. The (5) being cut back to Bowling Green, the (C)(M) and (R) getting their hours cut, the (D) and (N) becoming local in Manhattan (sans 6th Avenue between 34th Street and Grand). All short turn and reroutes being eliminated, dozens of bus routes eliminated. If these cuts happen, they're going to have to compensate in one way or another. At the very least, nothing is getting abandoned. 

Also, correct me if I'm wrong on this but the (MTA) needs to stop spending money on things they don't need.  ESI is a perfect example. 

145th St and Harlem-148th St would like a word with you.

  • LMAO! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Also, correct me if I'm wrong on this but the (MTA) needs to stop spending money on things they don't need.  ESI is a perfect example. 

Wasn't ESI one of Cuomo's pet projects, though? (Not that I'm entirely against it, as it would be nice to actually look at the stations and correct defects while sprucing them up, but the execution left much to be desired, and the whole thing was little more than political theater...)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

145th St and Harlem-148th St would like a word with you.

The M7 exists, as does the M102.

The fact of the matter is, very few specifically seek the (3) for its direct connections. It's by far the weakest in Brooklyn, whereas the Manhattan leg is almost purely compensation for the (2) being too packed under normal conditions. Without ridership seeing a significant rebound, and considering the fact that they're the weakest Lenox Avenue stations, I can't see anything less than the stations being closed and the route abandoned.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Also, correct me if I'm wrong on this but the (MTA) needs to stop spending money on things they don't need.

You'd think that'd be a good start.....

1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

145th St and Harlem-148th St would like a word with you.

In the grand scheme of things, a word is all they'll get.....

55 minutes ago, Lex said:

The fact of the matter is, very few specifically seek the (3) for its direct connections. It's by far the weakest in Brooklyn, whereas the Manhattan leg is almost purely compensation for the (2) being too packed under normal conditions.....

I've always viewed the (3) as a supplemental line..... (Of the IRT lines) Taking the (2) to Church is primary & taking the (3) to Utica is secondary (even though I'm much closer to Utica than I am Nostrand).... My "go to" is always the Brighton line, for several reasons.... More reliable, less BS you end up putting up with from passengers, simply quicker to get from Downtown Bklyn. to E. Flatbush, etc etc....

As far as the (3)'s standalone segment in Brooklyn, what even compares? The (R)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@LaGuardia Link N Tra I think they'd wouldn't just outright cut them, they'd probably try to redesign them to keep the busiest portions. (So to take Queens as an example, they'd probably keep all the orange routes more-or-less intact, cut most of the blue routes, and try to save the busiest portions of the purple and green routes). 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's see how draconian (wink wink) it can get. 

All lines run less frequently. If it's not listed below, then assume no route change.

(3) service eliminated.

(4) runs to New Lots Avenue.

(5) becomes the East 180th-Dyre shuttle.

(6) and (7) run less frequently.

(A) is express in Manhattan, local in Brooklyn, service to Lefferts AND the two Rockaway lines.

(B)(C)(W)(Z) and Rockaway (S) get eliminated.

(D) becomes Manhattan local.

(E) becomes all local and runs to both Jamaica terminals.

(F) runs between Queensbridge and Brooklyn.

(G) gets reduced to 2-cars.

(L) runs less frequently, with every other train turning at Myrtle or something.

(J) every other train runs from Manhattan to Broadway Junction.

(M) becomes Myrtle shuttle.

(N) becomes all local.

(R) becomes one-track 59 St-Bay Ridge shuttle.

(S) 42nd Street tunnel mysteriously "collapses", no more service.

 Staten Island Railway runs every hour.

Engineers somehow find a plethora of new problems with the R179s and the R46, so they go to scrap. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

  • LMAO! 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Lex said:

The fact of the matter is, very few specifically seek the (3) for its direct connections. It's by far the weakest in Brooklyn, whereas the Manhattan leg is almost purely compensation for the (2) being too packed under normal conditions.

Yeah, most of the (3) runs north of 135 St are deadheads anyway even during rush hour.

Edited by Bay Ridge Express

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Also, correct me if I'm wrong on this but the (MTA) needs to stop spending money on things they don't need.  ESI is a perfect example. 

There are multiple projects that aren't a priority right now, such as QBL CBTC (since ridership won't return to normal for a LONG time), these new "electric-diesel" engines they're getting, making SAS Phase 2 with ridiculously huge mezzanine's.  

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/23/2020 at 7:08 PM, Lex said:

The M7 exists, as does the M102.

The fact of the matter is, very few specifically seek the (3) for its direct connections. It's by far the weakest in Brooklyn, whereas the Manhattan leg is almost purely compensation for the (2) being too packed under normal conditions. Without ridership seeing a significant rebound, and considering the fact that they're the weakest Lenox Avenue stations, I can't see anything less than the stations being closed and the route abandoned.

If it got to that point, the (3) as I have noted can be reduced to a shuttle running between 148th and 34th-Penn Station and perhaps if further necessary cut back to 96th ((1) and (2) can both run local on Broadway-7th Avenue in that case). 

The (5) in this would face a similar cutback to Grand Central as I would do it.  

This would at least keep those lines going to midtown.  

Share this post


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

If it got to that point, the (3) as I have noted can be reduced to a shuttle running between 148th and 34th-Penn Station and perhaps if further necessary cut back to 96th ((1) and (2) can both run local on Broadway-7th Avenue in that case). 

The (5) in this would face a similar cutback to Grand Central as I would do it.  

This would at least keep those lines going to midtown.  

Truncating them to so far north in Midtown and forcing triborough trains to the local tracks is such a half-assed move that will only serve to piss more people off and exacerbate the hemorrhaging. Hard pass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until things are "back to normal", ridership will likely stay extremely depressed.  People are either teleworking or they're out of a job, so they don't need to use the subway daily. They have very few discretionary trips since most venues are closed.  The "once a week" trip to Manhattan or downtown to visit friends/shop/etc certainly is a drop in the bucket, compared to the Monthly/Weekly Unlimiteds many used to purchase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Lex said:

Truncating them to so far north in Midtown and forcing triborough trains to the local tracks is such a half-assed move that will only serve to piss more people off and exacerbate the hemorrhaging. Hard pass.

It's not ideal, but it's a case where they can most easily be turned.  Maybe you have the (3) go to 14th Street as actually was done for quite some time after 9/11 when the (1) and (2) both were locals (which I remember very well).

On the east side, you might be able to get away with having the (5) terminate at Grand Central and the (4) continuing to run express through there, but you'd need to have quick turns on the (5) to do that.  Other option there would be to have the (5) go local with the (6) in Manhattan and have both terminate at Brooklyn Bridge while the (4) runs as it normally does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/23/2020 at 11:05 PM, GojiMet86 said:

Let's see how draconian (wink wink) it can get. 

All lines run less frequently. If it's not listed below, then assume no route change.

(3) service eliminated.

(4) runs to New Lots Avenue.

(5) becomes the East 180th-Dyre shuttle.

(6) and (7) run less frequently.

(A) is express in Manhattan, local in Brooklyn, service to Lefferts AND the two Rockaway lines.

(B)(C)(W)(Z) and Rockaway (S) get eliminated.

(D) becomes Manhattan local.

(E) becomes all local and runs to both Jamaica terminals.

(F) runs between Queensbridge and Brooklyn.

(G) gets reduced to 2-cars.

(L) runs less frequently, with every other train turning at Myrtle or something.

(J) every other train runs from Manhattan to Broadway Junction.

(M) becomes Myrtle shuttle.

(N) becomes all local.

(R) becomes one-track 59 St-Bay Ridge shuttle.

(S) 42nd Street tunnel mysteriously "collapses", no more service.

 Staten Island Railway runs every hour.

Engineers somehow find a plethora of new problems with the R179s and the R46, so they go to scrap. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You are aware the (E) would have to be cut to eight cars, but yes, I can see where that could be done.

Another option is the one I noted where the (brownM) returns to being a brown line and is combined with a truncated (R) running Metropolitan Avenue-Bay Ridge (as noted, effectively the old <RR> "bankers special" as a 24/7 line).  The current (R) is truncated to Whitehall to 71st-Continental while the (W) is eliminated and the current (J) becomes orange and replaces the current (M) on 6th Avenue, running via 63rd to 96th-2nd with the (Q).  

I would also have the (G) go back to being to 71st-Continental, allowing the (E) to actually go back to being an express at all times. 

As I also noted on mine, the (C) becomes a Lefferts-Euclid shuttle except for rush hours when it runs to/from 34th-Penn Station while the (A) operates fully to Far Rockaway and the Rockaway (S) officially becomes (H) and actually becomes a full-time route between Euclid and Rockaway Park. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

It's not ideal, but it's a case where they can most easily be turned.  Maybe you have the (3) go to 14th Street as actually was done for quite some time after 9/11 when the (1) and (2) both were locals (which I remember very well).

On the east side, you might be able to get away with having the (5) terminate at Grand Central and the (4) continuing to run express through there, but you'd need to have quick turns on the (5) to do that.  Other option there would be to have the (5) go local with the (6) in Manhattan and have both terminate at Brooklyn Bridge while the (4) runs as it normally does.

If you're going to insist on the (3) continuing to exist without sending it to Brooklyn, run it on its original route to South Ferry in lieu of the (1) short-turns to/from 137th Street and leave the (2) alone. Otherwise, just get rid of it, as it'll be more trouble than it's worth.

If the (2) remains in Brooklyn and (6) frequencies remain fairly high, make the Bowling Green short-turn (from Dyre Avenue) the only service pattern. If the (6) frequency drops low enough, shift the (5) to the local tracks and serve as the second local to Brooklyn Bridge. If, for whatever reason, the (2) gets kicked out of Brooklyn, restore the switches between Borough Hall and Hoyt Street and have the (5) simply maintain the full route with express service confined to Manhattan.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

You are aware the (E) would have to be cut to eight cars, but yes, I can see where that could be done.

No, that’s not what’s being proposed. The (E) will still go to World Trade Center. But in Queens it will fork at Briarwood, serving both Jamaica–179 Street and Jamaica Center–Parsons/Archer.

10 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

Another option is the one I noted where the (brownM) returns to being a brown line and is combined with a truncated (R) running Metropolitan Avenue-Bay Ridge (as noted, effectively the old <RR> "bankers special" as a 24/7 line).  The current (R) is truncated to Whitehall to 71st-Continental while the (W) is eliminated and the current (J) becomes orange and replaces the current (M) on 6th Avenue, running via 63rd to 96th-2nd with the (Q).  

I would also have the (G) go back to being to 71st-Continental, allowing the (E) to actually go back to being an express at all times.

These replace routes that people want with routes that people do not want (e.g.: Midtown Manhattan (R) → Lower Manhattan (brownM)). The writing has been on the walls for a while: the MTA wants to contain the Brooklyn-Broadway Line, and it won’t be spreading it further into other parts of the system where trains will be forced to shorten. Running short trains is not economical as they carry less people (and increased pressure on social distancing as well) while requiring the same amount of resources to operate.

10 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

As I also noted on mine, the (C) becomes a Lefferts-Euclid shuttle except for rush hours when it runs to/from 34th-Penn Station while the (A) operates fully to Far Rockaway and the Rockaway (S) officially becomes (H) and actually becomes a full-time route between Euclid and Rockaway Park.

The Rockaways will be getting a service increase then. This adds to the cost of operating service where the ridership is the lowest in the entire subway system.

 

Returning to the big picture: Other than @GojiMet86’s obviously joke proposal, every other proposal—including mine—is basically like stirring (L)(E)(TT)(3)<RR>(S) in a can of alphabet soup ($1) while the crib ($1,000,000) is burning down. Of course, I’m beating a dead horse here.

Edited by CenSin
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, CenSin said:

No, that’s not what’s being proposed. The (E) will still go to World Trade Center. But in Queens it will fork at Briarwood, serving both Jamaica–179 Street and Jamaica Center–Parsons/Archer.

These replace routes that people want with routes that people do not want (e.g.: Midtown Manhattan (R) → Lower Manhattan (brownM)). The writing has been on the walls for a while: the MTA wants to contain the Brooklyn-Broadway Line, and it won’t be spreading it further into other parts of the system where trains will be forced to shorten. Running short trains is not economical as they carry less people (and increased pressure on social distancing as well) while requiring the same amount of resources to operate.

The Rockaways will be getting a service increase then. This adds to the cost of operating service where the ridership is the lowest in the entire subway system.

Returning to the big picture: Other than @GojiMet86’s obviously joke proposal, every other proposal—including mine—is basically like stirring (L)(E)(TT)(3)<RR>(S) in a can of alphabet soup ($1) while the crib ($1,000,000) is burning down. Of course, I’m beating a dead horse here.

Mine is far from perfect, but this is about making the best of a really bad situation:

So I was wrong on the (E), I was thinking in terms of running a Jamaica Center loop (Upper to lower level and vice versa).  The return of the Brown (brownM) basically becoming a 24/7 version of the old <RR> "bankers special" had more to do with people looking for midtown and so forth often transferring to the (D) or (N) as it was the first chance they got.  Plus, such gains a major transfer point at Fulton between (in my proposal) the (2)(4) and (A) trains at Fulton. The (J) would simply be replacing the (M) on 6th Avenue in this and running to 96th-2nd actually means a service increase for arguably the most densely populated area of not only New York but arguably the entire country.  Having eight-car trains are NOT ideal, but it's doing the best with what you have.

Anyway, this is attempt #3 at this:

(1) and (2) run as they do now, except the (2) northbound stops at 79th and 86th Street (skips such southbound). 

(3) is a shuttle between 148-Lenox Terminal and 96th Street at all times. 

(4) runs at all times from Woodlawn-New Lots Avenue, express in Manhattan

(5) runs all times except late nights between Dyre Avenue and Brooklyn Bridge as a local in Manhattan (late nights runs as it does now) 

(6) and (7) run as they do now, but no express service peak hours 

(A) runs all times between 207th and Far Rockaway.

(B), (M)(R)(W) and (Z) are eliminated. 

(C) runs 168th Street-Metropolitan Avenue, replacing the (M) along the Broadway-Brooklyn and Myrtle El lines.  Late nights runs as a shuttle as the (M) currently does, runs to 168 all other times. 

(D)(E)(F)(G), and (Q) run as they do now except the (E) now becomes a full-time local to/from Jamaica Center. 

(J) is extended to 95th Street-Bay Ridge at all times and replaces the now-defunct (R) in Brooklyn.

(N) runs full-time as a 4th Avenue local through the tunnel.

Grand Central-Times Square (S) runs rush hours only

Franklin Avenue and Rockaway Park (S) run as they do now except the Rockaway (S) is full-time.

There is also a Euclid-Lefferts (S) at all times with some (A) service to/from Lefferts rush hours.

Edited by Wallyhorse
Adding Lefferts Shuttle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wally is obsessed with tinkering with the (M) train.... over the years he suggested it be sent to Forest Hills, 96th, 145th and now Bay Ridge-95th street.

 

 

Leave the (M) line alone, Middle Village, Ridgewood residents don't want the brown (M) back.

  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 2

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.