|
|
| Re: The (V) Still Looking For Love And Respect (455433) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: The (V) Still Looking For Love And Respect |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Tue Jul 3 18:12:34 2007, in response to Re: The (V) Still Looking For Love And Respect, posted by Osmosis Jones on Tue Jul 3 15:34:36 2007. Let's check the math. The signal system allows for a train to pass by every 2 minutes, maybe with tweaking 90 seconds between trains. Let's use the 2-minute rule to make the math easier, a train every 2 minutes regardless of whether one is using the express track or the local track.This works out to 30 trains in the peak direction (30 x 2 = 60) per hour. Since there are two services on the express tracks that means 15 trains per hour for the E route, and 15 trains for the F route. For reasons I won't go into it is believed that the Archer complex can handle only 12 trains per hour. With about 3 E route trains coming out of 179th Street. Or one could have 18 F trains coming out of 179th Street - see one can play with numbers. See the funny thing about these numbers is that they were established on day one of the subway system, and they have not changed. Regardless of the location of terminals, the types of trains and other mundane transit stuff - the basic number of trains per hour exists as a basic "law". It has been well established that the Queens Blvd E and F trains are over crowded for the journey to and from Manhattan. To make it plain there are no more "extra trains" that one can add to the express tracks. It has been this way for decades - so saying that the express trains are over-crowded is nothing new, not a surprise. The Queens Blvd system was designed, built, and opened in 1933 so that the G route would serve as the local route - meaning those riders would have to transfer to reach Manhattan - adding to the crowds on the E and F routes. So even if the G-train route had 15 or 30 trains per hour, and were filled to the brim with riders - it did not matter since those riders would/must transfer to trains to Mahattan since the G did not go to Manhattan. In that goal the G-train was useless. Of course G-train riders in Brooklyn did like the frequency of service. So in the mid-1950's, the connection from Queens Plaza to the BMT-Astoria route was built, to allow Queens Blvd. local stations to have a direct route to Manhattan. The names of the routes were EE, N and R - but the purpose was to alleviate congestion on the express routes by using the 60th Street tunnel. However this was not enough, stations along 53rd Street were dangerously crowded, and there were deaths from riders falling onto the tracks when the crowds were heavy. Hence the new plan in 1968, the Second Avenue subway and its new Queens routes were planned, and budgeted for. The whole project was cut into 4 sections, the 63rd Street Tunnel segment, the Archer Avenue segment, and the Queens Super-Express segment, and the Southeast Queens Extension segment. In order to get the project started the funding was secured for the first two segements - 63rd Street Tunnel and Archer Avenue. The Archer Avenue segement fulfilled plans to re-shape the J train service and revamp Queens transit. The city's fiscal crisis, NIMBY concerns and activities of politicians, etc - resulted in the "tunnel to nowhere" and the Archer Avenue segment being the only built and useable parts of the whole plan. As I had said before the current F-service across the 63rd Street tunnel was a COMPROMISE given the situation as it presented itself. The F-train across 63rd Street allows that tunnel to be used for an express service which was why it was built. With the F-train using the 63rd Street tunnel, there is "room" for another service to use 53rd Street, hence the V train. The V train being a local route along Queens Blvd. gives such riders another direct route to Manhattan - where they want to go - without needing to transfer to another crowded train. The V train can "fit" with both the E and F train services without disrupting either. Of course some G-train riders did not like the shortened G-route, but there are simply way more riders wanting to go to Manhattan then wanting to travel between Queens and Brooklyn. The V-train solves a need - all local service to Manhattan - about 30 trains per hour as a maximum, while the express routes have their 30 trains per hour as a maximum to Manhattan - the place where the majority of riders want to go. There are no trains to be added to the express tracks - but that was known decades ago. Mike |
|
|
|