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  
R10 2952

A Solution to Overcrowding on the (E)

Recommended Posts

I have been thinking. Whenever I am on the (E) [that is, rarely], it is always quite packed. I have been thinking about how they can fix that, and came up with an idea: Assuming that the (MTA) is not hemorhagging money right now, and assuming that there would be no significant problems doing so, a possible solution could be to resurrect the (K), though in a slightly different form. My proposition is such-

A (K) train, running from Jamaica Center or 71st Avenue-Forest Hills in Queens to Euclid Avenue in Brooklyn during weekday rush hours. Express along Queens Blvd, express along 8th Ave, and express or local along Fulton St. the line would help out the (E) in Queens/Manhattan, and would help out the (C) and (E) in Manhattan/Brooklyn. Again, assuming that the SMEEs aren't going away that quickly, the line would use a mix of R-32s, the last 10 R-38s, R-40S/M, R-42s, and some R-160s.

Do you guys think that such a line would be beneficial at all to people using these lines [like me (I take the A)], and would it be a good idea in general?

Let me know what you think. Thanks!:cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely not Jamaica Ctr., there's already a problem with turning trains there IIRC. It looks fine but, how many trains are you going to assign to the K and the E? And will this affect V service? And this will be a THIRD QBL service. Will that mess up F service as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to burst your bubble but the only way the E will not be so crowded is:

 

 

-Queens Blvd gets new signaling, allowing more trains to run on the express tracks.

 

-Jamaica Center stops being the terminal and the line is extended south like originally intended so the E can run more trains.

 

-Super Express is built.

 

 

 

All I can think of right now. Probably a few moe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its sounds good an it would be better if the line Continued to the Rockaways. However the reality its un workable. Lets look at it a section at a time. Jamaica Center can't handle more then it got now an Continenal is the same way we already back up to woodheaven even with just (R)(V) Service. The (E) is always crawded but it always runs a tight headway and any service interuption causes an instint backup. Now Between Continenal an Queens Plaza you have increased conjustion on the Express with it running with the (E)(F) service which keeps a 2-3 Minute headway during the rush hour. Then Queens Plaza to 5 AV you got the (V). Then the (A) runs a good amount of trains so the problem would be between Canal and Hoyt St when you got all the services together which will cause back ups and delay (E) service even more. They relay at Euclid wouldn't be much of a problem but they have to add switchmen to keep back ups at a min.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see the (K) train come back, but the (K) you have there is like the (E) train except that it goes past the World Trade Center station to Euclid Avenue. The (K) that you have here is basically the (E) in Queens, (C) in Brooklyn, and both the (C) and (E) in Manhattan. Now I like your idea here, it would take the load off the (E), but it will make the (F) and (V) trains less frequent. The (F) sharing the express tracks with the (E) and the (V) at 53rd st.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

71st to Euclid is a new one on me...honestly I'd try almost anything once. But Dave seems to know what he's talking about and since he actually works on the system i'd trust him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Queens corridor is pretty much at capacity as far a service & lines go for rush hours. I was told, unofficially of course, the R179 cars, the next implement of the tech trains contracts will be designed specifically for queens rush hour service to get more people on each train. They will be like R160's but 75 foot cars, locked end doors, of 4 car consists. 5 SETS of doors per side, and NO PASSENGER SEATS on the 'B'/middle 2 cars of each set. We'll see..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the whole thing could be refined. For example, The (V) should be limited to as little trains as possible, maybe even only run during non-rush hours, the (G) should stay the same, (E) trains could be decreased by 1-3 trains less per hour, (F) trains could be decreased by 3-7 trains per hour, and (A) trains decreased by 2-5 trains per hour, and (C) trains decreased by 4 trains per hour. Yes it would not be too good, but then again, it would not be too bad. This (K) would allow for things to be balanced during rush hours; it would fill in those missing spots. And as for between Canal Street to Hoyt, some (K) trains could run down that line, while some could use the (F) between West 4th and Jay Sts. Let's say that only 20 (K) trains per hour can go down the Lower 8th Ave Line, and the total capacity for the (K) would be 36 trains per hour. Those 16 trains could go down 6th Avenue with the (F) to Jay Street. It would be a tiny bit inconvenient, but it would give riders on the Lower East Side and DUMBO access to the (K) as well. This would very easily show what an important line it could potentially be for people. It would certainly be doable when Queens Blvd. gets CBTC. And forget Jamaica center. You're right. It could just run from Continental Avenue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, the whole thing could be refined. For example, The (V) should be limited to as little trains as possible, maybe even only run during non-rush hours, the (G) should stay the same, (E) trains could be decreased by 1-3 trains less per hour, (F) trains could be decreased by 3-7 trains per hour, and (A) trains decreased by 2-5 trains per hour, and (C) trains decreased by 4 trains per hour. Yes it would not be too good, but then again, it would not be too bad. This (K) would allow for things to be balanced during rush hours; it would fill in those missing spots. And as for between Canal Street to Hoyt, some (K) trains could run down that line, while some could use the (F) between West 4th and Jay Sts. Let's say that only 20 (K) trains per hour can go down the Lower 8th Ave Line, and the total capacity for the (K) would be 36 trains per hour. Those 16 trains could go down 6th Avenue with the (F) to Jay Street. It would be a tiny bit inconvenient, but it would give riders on the Lower East Side and DUMBO access to the (K) as well. This would very easily show what an important line it could potentially be for people. It would certainly be doable when Queens Blvd. gets CBTC.

 

If that is what you are advocating then that will not ease overcrowding one bit. It will just be a zero sum game on Queens Blvd as those tracks get back to capacity with your new (K) service. Meanwhile, upper Manhattan and Brooklyn get hurt by decreased (A) service, and Roosevelt Island, Park Slope, and 6th avenue get hurt by decreased (F) service.

 

Also as presently configured, no line can run 36 tph. The tightest headways possible are 2 minutes (30 tph) on sections of track that do not include terminals. Anything more frequent than that won't work, especially if you've got trains using a terminal. There is no way WTC turns 30 tph without jacking up the railroad (for the sake of argument we'll say 18 of your K's and 12 E's), not to mention you've got the other 18 E's confusing passengers and going down 6th ave and causing delays at W4, where do they turn? No way 2nd Ave turns them all plus the (V)...

 

Just saying, Queens Blvd. is a problem, and there's really not much that can be done to alleviate the crowding. It's the Lexington Avenue of the outer boros and the only thing that will ease congestion is another line someday but we all know that's not going to happen any time in the foreseeable future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
R10 1989, the (V) is needed during rush hours. You should see how many people ride on the (V) from West 4th Street to Lexington Avenue-53rd Street during the height of the AM rush.

 

I've seen it. But the (E) is even worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If that is what you are advocating then that will not ease overcrowding one bit. It will just be a zero sum game on Queens Blvd as those tracks get back to capacity with your new (K) service. Meanwhile, upper Manhattan and Brooklyn get hurt by decreased (A) service, and Roosevelt Island, Park Slope, and 6th avenue get hurt by decreased (F) service.

 

Also as presently configured, no line can run 36 tph. The tightest headways possible are 2 minutes (30 tph) on sections of track that do not include terminals. Anything more frequent than that won't work, especially if you've got trains using a terminal. There is no way WTC turns 30 tph without jacking up the railroad (for the sake of argument we'll say 18 of your K's and 12 E's), not to mention you've got the other 18 E's confusing passengers and going down 6th ave and causing delays at W4, where do they turn? No way 2nd Ave turns them all plus the (V)...

 

Just saying, Queens Blvd. is a problem, and there's really not much that can be done to alleviate the crowding. It's the Lexington Avenue of the outer boros and the only thing that will ease congestion is another line someday but we all know that's not going to happen any time in the foreseeable future.

 

I take the (A) almost every day in Upper Manhattan and Brooklyn. YES, service would be hurt, but the plan could be worked out so that the reductions on the (A) could be minimal. Same with the (F). And as for 36 tph, I was just giving a random example. 36 came right out of the air. And WTC would NOT be turning (K) trains. Only (E)s. And it would be the (K) going down 6th Ave, not the (E). And the (K) would be a through service. It would not terminate at 2nd Avenue. But your right about a new line. Well, maybe not a line, but perhaps they can build 2-4 extra tracks along Queens Blvd, either alongside some of the current ones, or below them, on a lower level. Perhaps they can find a sensible use for the Roosevelt Avenue Terminal Station.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CBTC could go on the QBL.

 

If T/A wants CBTC wouldnt this mean that all of the 8th ave line have it for the (E) same for (F) on 6th - Culver? And if that happens wouldnt it have to expand for the other lines?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

id say leave it the way it is.

 

im not gonna lie... The (E)(V) are super crowded in the morning, mostly the (E), but id say leave it the way it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The TA is concentrating on making the Queens Boluevard Express and Flushing lines CBTC at the moment.

 

Yeah but only between Union Turnpike an 179/Jamaica CTR. They still have to do those nice long G.Os everyone hates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, the whole thing could be refined. For example, The (V) should be limited to as little trains as possible, maybe even only run during non-rush hours, the (G) should stay the same, (E) trains could be decreased by 1-3 trains less per hour, (F) trains could be decreased by 3-7 trains per hour, and (A) trains decreased by 2-5 trains per hour, and (C) trains decreased by 4 trains per hour. Yes it would not be too good, but then again, it would not be too bad. This (K) would allow for things to be balanced during rush hours; it would fill in those missing spots. And as for between Canal Street to Hoyt, some (K) trains could run down that line, while some could use the (F) between West 4th and Jay Sts. Let's say that only 20 (K) trains per hour can go down the Lower 8th Ave Line, and the total capacity for the (K) would be 36 trains per hour. Those 16 trains could go down 6th Avenue with the (F) to Jay Street. It would be a tiny bit inconvenient, but it would give riders on the Lower East Side and DUMBO access to the (K) as well. This would very easily show what an important line it could potentially be for people. It would certainly be doable when Queens Blvd. gets CBTC. And forget Jamaica center. You're right. It could just run from Continental Avenue.

The entire point of the (V) is to alleviate (E) crowding during rush hours. Getting rid of it just for the (K) defeats the purpose.

 

This is what you are proposing during the rush:

The (E) runs 12 TPH, down from 15. Runs every 5 minutes.

The (F) runs 8 TPH, down from 15. Runs every 7.5 minutes.

No (V). The (R) is the only QB local, running every 6-8 minutes.

The (A) runs 8 TPH. Runs every 7.5 minutes.

The (C) runs 2 TPH. Runs every 30 minutes.

 

You only have 10 extra TPH on the QB line, 20 if you put in CBTC. However, that lowers to about 15 extra TPH since the (K) has to then come out of Forest Hills and switch over to the express track, delaying (R) and (E)(F) service. Then you have confusion over which tunnel the (K) is traveling through between Manhattan and Brooklyn. The (F) cannot run every 7 and a half minutes. That is almost doubling the current TPH. The QB express stations will be crowded waiting for (F) trains to come. You are then making (A) service worse too, making people wait as much as 15 minutes during the rush just to go to the airport. Sorry, but it's just not feasible.

 

For me, I'd say this:

 

Re-arrange the Queens Blvd. Lines. like this:

-(E) Stay Same.

-(F) Runs the same from Brooklyn to Rockfeller Center but runs through the 53rd Street Tunnel and normal through Queens.

-(G) Stays Same.

-(K) Runs Local from Euclid to 50th Street in Manhattan, dig it to go through the 63rd Street Tunnel and meet with the (V), continue Express along Queens Blvd. but goes to 179th Street via center tracks between Sutphin and 179th Street.

-(V) Runs the same from 2nd Ave. to Rockfeller but runs through the 63rd Street Connector.

-(R) Runs the same.

 

This will probably even out and balance the service better.

No. There is a reason why the (F) is on 63rd and the (V) on 53rd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

YES, service would be hurt, but the plan could be worked out so that the reductions on the (A) could be minimal.
So what's the point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a Queens Blvd. Rider, but as far as I see it, there's no hope of adding trains except by CBTC signaling.

 

 

The (C) runs 2 TPH. Runs every 30 minutes.

 

This is slightly off topic, but this is absolutely insane. I'm a Central Park West Rider and the (C) gets a chalk full of riders along 8th avenue to Central Park. It would be annoying having to get off at 59th to wait for a (B) when there could be a train there to fulfill and help the task already. And you're also neglecting the riders that get off of the ©'s tip of Manhattan stops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is slightly off topic, but this is absolutely insane. I'm a Central Park West Rider and the (C) gets a chalk full of riders along 8th avenue to Central Park. It would be annoying having to get off at 59th to wait for a (B) when there could be a train there to fulfill and help the task already. And you're also neglecting the riders that get off of the ©'s tip of Manhattan stops.

That wasn't my proposal. That was his, and I was making what he was really proposing clear to him. The (C) runs 6TPH, and reducing it by 4 TPH makes it run 2 TPH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One solution to ease overcrowding on the (E) is to take people off the (E) and take express buses. With the exception of Staten Island and portions of the Bronx the express bus system in NYC is not used to its full extent. The MTA should better promote Queens express bus routes and run better service on these express routes. Then maybe some (E) line riders will start shifting from the subway to the express bus.

 

Another Solution is the LIRR, which some commuters in Queens already use (I remember when I rode the Q40 once the bus got to jamaica station some people took the LIRR into the city instead of the (E)).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One solution to ease overcrowding on the (E) is to take people off the (E) and take express buses. With the exception of Staten Island and portions of the Bronx the express bus system in NYC is not used to its full extent. The MTA should better promote Queens express bus routes and run better service on these express routes. Then maybe some (E) line riders will start shifting from the subway to the express bus.

 

Another Solution is the LIRR, which some commuters in Queens already use (I remember when I rode the Q40 once the bus got to jamaica station some people took the LIRR into the city instead of the (E)).

I agree. Now that they added the bus routes to the map, it's much easier to know which express buses go near your home or neighborhood. I just can't wait until they put the Guide-A-Rides at every (MTA) Bus stop so people actually know the bus stops there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One solution to ease overcrowding on the (E) is to take people off the (E) and take express buses. With the exception of Staten Island and portions of the Bronx the express bus system in NYC is not used to its full extent. The MTA should better promote Queens express bus routes and run better service on these express routes. Then maybe some (E) line riders will start shifting from the subway to the express bus.

 

Another Solution is the LIRR, which some commuters in Queens already use (I remember when I rode the Q40 once the bus got to jamaica station some people took the LIRR into the city instead of the (E)).

 

I agree. Now that they added the bus routes to the map, it's much easier to know which express buses go near your home or neighborhood. I just can't wait until they put the Guide-A-Rides at every (MTA) Bus stop so people actually know the bus stops there.

 

The thing is, both of those services are more expensive than the subway. You have to consider that too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If T/A wants CBTC wouldnt this mean that all of the 8th ave line have it for the (E) same for (F) on 6th - Culver? And if that happens wouldnt it have to expand for the other lines?

No, not the entire lines. They will do the QBL express tracks only. The reason why the R160s went over to Jamaica is because they are planning to put CBTC on those tracks. The R160s will take advantage of that technology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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