|
|
| Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? (1377833) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 7 of 15 |
||
|
| (1379509) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Dec 31 18:27:01 2015, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Dec 31 17:36:03 2015. When they become mouse clicks for a console, they are just as stubborn to do it. |
|
|
| (1379510) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Dec 31 19:21:54 2015, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Dec 31 17:36:03 2015. Keep your fingers off of the interlocking levers and the railroad will run much faster and more smoothly.As long as it goes where the passengers want to go. I assume you that if you send 10 tph to Astoria with no switching, but 15 tph worth of passengers want to go there, you will not get smoothness. And if you send the 15 tph that are needed there, but they originate from points where they are not needed, like 95th Street, you just waste money. |
|
|
| (1379515) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Thu Dec 31 20:14:54 2015, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Michael549 on Thu Dec 31 17:16:50 2015. Unfortunately nowadays "the passengers leave the train" part is too long. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1379525) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Dec 31 21:28:06 2015, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by R30A on Thu Dec 31 18:11:58 2015. There are actually some Rs that terminate there at the end of the AM rush and lay up either to 36 St Yd or CI Yd. |
|
|
| (1379539) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Thu Dec 31 22:29:12 2015, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by randyo on Thu Dec 31 21:28:06 2015. That is post peak reverse peak! |
|
|
| (1379549) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Fri Jan 1 01:54:41 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Joe V on Thu Dec 31 11:57:57 2015. You can turn a southbound arriving train @ 36/4 th by having the t/o change ends in the station. The way the switch configuration is: when the t/o moves north from either the express or local track he can only wind up on the northbound express track. This is safely done by signal control with the t/o making a "reverse move". Of course it is only advisable in an emergency. The following southbound trains are held south of 25/4 and since the train is being crossed against the plant you also have to hold the next arriving northbound express. |
|
|
| (1379550) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Fri Jan 1 02:37:37 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Michael549 on Thu Dec 31 17:16:50 2015. That was the point I was making.Didnt know there were so many dumbasses here of brians calliber. Shame. |
|
|
| (1379551) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Fri Jan 1 02:43:53 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Joe V on Thu Dec 31 13:00:01 2015. No.It doesn't have to. Damn. You folks are So stuck in your ridged know b it all isms... |
|
|
| (1379566) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Fri Jan 1 08:48:23 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Fri Jan 1 01:54:41 2016. But that gets into TA policy of dislike of terminating a service on a live, thru track. |
|
|
| (1379568) | |
Re: 4th Avenue Service via Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Jan 1 08:56:09 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Edwards! on Thu Dec 31 11:54:26 2015. Problem is that is they have to do work on the Nassau portion of the Montauge Tunnel, which from what I've seen elsewhere has been out of service since the Sandy repairs.And I would do that anyway by making the (Z) a full-time line, running from 95th Street at ALL TIMES, going to Broadway Junction weekdays from 5:30 AM-11:00 PM and late nights (11:00 PM-5:30 AM) and weekends (11:00 PM Friday-5:30 AM Monday) to Metropolitan Avenue. This would eliminate the (R) shuttle late nights and the (M) shuttles late nights and weekends. That would supplement the (R) during the day on 4th Avenue and allow the (D) and (N) to be express at all times in Brooklyn. |
|
|
| (1379572) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Fri Jan 1 09:46:02 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Joe V on Fri Jan 1 08:48:23 2016. That was my point of posting that. You cannot have a service plan where a southbound train terminates at 36th. without messing up everything else. You should send it to 9th Ave. |
|
|
| (1379573) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Jan 1 09:51:01 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Joe V on Thu Dec 31 13:00:01 2015. Great post. Edwards is so wrong, as usual. |
|
|
| (1379574) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Jan 1 09:52:26 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Fri Jan 1 01:54:41 2016. Of course it is only advisable in an emergency.Exactly. Edwards is wrong, as usual. |
|
|
| (1379575) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Fri Jan 1 10:02:20 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Fri Jan 1 09:46:02 2016. Correct. If they throw everyone off at 36th, then physically change ends at 9th Av, where would the "fumigation" process take place ? |
|
|
| (1379576) | |
Re: 4th Avenue Service via Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Fri Jan 1 10:04:36 2016, in response to Re: 4th Avenue Service via Nassau Street, posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Jan 1 08:56:09 2016. They also have clearance bans on the R32's and R42's in a portion of rebuilt-Montague, which I have not heard they have done anything about. |
|
|
| (1379581) | |
Re: 4th Avenue Service via Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Fri Jan 1 10:43:16 2016, in response to Re: 4th Avenue Service via Nassau Street, posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Jan 1 08:56:09 2016. While your plan wouldn't be cost neutral, I think it a creative idea to use a "new" overnight route to eliminate shuttles and transfers, making it not as costly.But having the D and N run express overnight in Brooklyn isn't all that necessary. Not exactly a major action item, especially at a time when MTA has showed its preference for overnight local service by making the Q Broadway Local at night. Also, the D would still probably be better off running local as it has to stop at DeKalb. To stop at the DeKalb bridge track from the 4th Ave express means cutting off the 4th Ave local, and the Brighton service. Probably not too hard at overnight intervals, but still that's what's necessary. (Skipping DeKalb overnight would not be an option). I do wonder, however, if the D currently runs local on 4th Ave at night because of interest in serving those local stations, or because running express wouldn't save on crew costs, or because of the switching situation, or all or some of these. |
|
|
| (1379588) | |
Re: 4th Avenue Service via Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Fri Jan 1 11:42:25 2016, in response to Re: 4th Avenue Service via Nassau Street, posted by New Flyer #857 on Fri Jan 1 10:43:16 2016. I think the whole idea is to keep switching to a minimum (the local Q quashes that notion, though). Since most trains run at 20-minute intervals during the late hours, increasing local service reduces wait times, especially on routes such as the IRT West Side and East Side lines.IINM the only 24/7 expresses left are the Fred in Queens and D along 6th Ave. and CPW. |
|
|
| (1379590) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Jan 1 11:51:31 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by AlM on Thu Dec 31 19:21:54 2015. TRains frequently run empty into low volume teritory because that is where they can be turned without getting in the way. Hey... short turn every 3rd at Whitehall or at 9/36 and then you will have the mix you want, unbalanced as it may be.If one part of the LION kneads 15 tph, then the whole lion gets 15 tph. Or maybe you run 10 tph to 95 and add a W at 5 or 6 thph to whitehall. ROAR |
|
|
| (1379591) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Jan 1 11:57:17 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by randyo on Thu Dec 31 21:28:06 2015. Make 9Av/36St LL the Last Stop. There are three tracks there and the gooses can go up stairs to sort themselfs out without delaying the 4th Ave line.ROAR |
|
|
| (1379592) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Jan 1 11:58:51 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Edwards! on Fri Jan 1 02:37:37 2016. So... Make 9th Avenue/36th Lower Level the Last stop. How hard is that? You just have to clean up the platforms and put them back into service.Simple. ROAR |
|
|
| (1379593) | |
Re: 4th Avenue Service via Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Fri Jan 1 12:29:58 2016, in response to Re: 4th Avenue Service via Nassau Street, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Fri Jan 1 11:42:25 2016. I would say the D is fine, but the F running express can be problematic because it is not synced well with the E local and because there is no common stop on the western end before the two routes diverge (to 53rd and 63rd Sts).If you board a CPW local stop and want 6th Ave you wait about 7-8 minutes at Columbus Circle, and the same thing going back if you want the local but came from 6th Ave. That's a good buffer for night service (in case of slowdowns and the like) without being unreasonably long. Queens Blvd doesn't seem to work as neatly. Right now it seems the E follows right after the F coming into Forest Hills, so if you get on from 67 Ave to Elmhurst you have a massive wait for the F at Roosevelt. Same thing waiting for an E local going back after getting off an F from Manhattan. But you can also stay on the E until 7th Ave for about a 7 minute wait for a southbound D to also access 6th Ave. That D would enter 34th St two minutes ahead of the F you would have waited for at Roosevelt. (This is according to current posted schedules). |
|
|
| (1379596) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Jan 1 13:42:24 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Joe V on Fri Jan 1 10:02:20 2016. In that scenario, maybe they could learn not to waste time "fumigating". |
|
|
| (1379607) | |
Re: 4th Avenue Service via Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Fri Jan 1 16:24:20 2016, in response to Re: 4th Avenue Service via Nassau Street, posted by New Flyer #857 on Fri Jan 1 12:29:58 2016. Keeping the D express along 6th Ave. eliminates two switching maneuvers. Plus you can leave the interlocking south of 59th lined up for the D all night long. |
|
|
| (1379611) | |
Re: 4th Avenue Service via Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Fri Jan 1 17:05:56 2016, in response to Re: 4th Avenue Service via Nassau Street, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Fri Jan 1 16:24:20 2016. From a previous message:"Keeping the D express along 6th Ave. eliminates two switching maneuvers. Plus you can leave the interlocking south of 59th lined up for the D all night long." I think it appears that one could have the switches north of the 135th Street station set for the midnight hour D-trains to use the express tracks, as well as the switches at 59th Street-Columbus Circle set for the D-train to head to/from the Sixth Avenue line. I believe that almost no other switches would need to be set for the D-train until it reached the Brooklyn-side of the Manhattan Bridge. Of course the situation for the DeKalb Avenue complex and the 36th Street-Fourth Avenue station are a different manner. Again, of course, the usual mid-night hour diversions of train traffic due to maintenance or other happenings - would not suggest a "hands off" situation, either. Mike |
|
|
| (1379625) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Jan 1 19:40:01 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Jan 1 11:57:17 2016. That would require substantial reconstruction of the LL platforms at 9 Av which includes lengthening the platforms for 600 ft trains. |
|
|
| (1379630) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Jan 1 19:57:39 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Jan 1 11:58:51 2016. AsI mentioned in my other post, the LL platforms would also have to be lengthened to hola a 600 ft train. |
|
|
| (1379637) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Fri Jan 1 20:17:48 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Jan 1 13:42:24 2016. Fumigating is not wasting time. Trains have had cords pulled while relaying by a panicked passenger. Train Operators have been robbed of personal property while changing ends, then the perp escapes by exiting the train in between cars. I don't care if these happen occasionally. Any person against fumigation is a person who doesn't give a damn about the safety of the train crew. "So what if they get assaulted, there is always another crew to take their place". |
|
|
| (1379639) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jan 1 20:26:26 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Fri Jan 1 20:17:48 2016. Any person against fumigation is a person who doesn't give a damn about the safety of the train crew.Suppose the train were operated without a train crew, either remotely or with ATO. Does this satisfy your objection? |
|
|
| (1379640) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Jan 1 20:26:32 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Fri Jan 1 20:17:48 2016. Would have been better (yeah, lots of luck) to just have a switchman board the other end so no walk was required. Of course, they'd NEVER do that again like we used to. |
|
|
| (1379648) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Andrew Saucci on Fri Jan 1 21:41:21 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Fri Jan 1 20:17:48 2016. It actually is a waste of time when one considers that a couple of cameras in every car could allow the conductor and train operator to check the train in far less time without actually walking it unless someone does not leave. It's only a matter of time, some money, and some union negotiations before this becomes a reality. It will be either that or FAST (fully automated subway train) systems or both. One day "fumigation" (I actually hate the term more than the practice) will probably be done from a master tower of sorts. |
|
|
| (1379651) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Jan 1 21:55:23 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Andrew Saucci on Fri Jan 1 21:41:21 2016. You still need to change ends. Unless things have changed, the conductor steps off at the terminal and unless you have a switchman on the tail end, you still have to walk to the other end through the train. |
|
|
| (1379657) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Fri Jan 1 22:22:29 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Jan 1 20:26:32 2016. The transit workers are still potentially endangered if a cord is pulled or if the train doesn't recharge when the t/o at on the other end takes over. Of course with the R1/9's the latter was not an issue. |
|
|
| (1379658) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Fri Jan 1 22:23:01 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jan 1 20:26:26 2016. Yes. |
|
|
| (1379661) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Jan 1 22:28:32 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Fri Jan 1 22:22:29 2016. Yeah, I feel you there. Back when we had transit cops, they could at least provide a chaperone if need be. But I could see that not happening either.That's why I giggled over automation there, automation always works, never craps out and lays down on the interlocking. :) |
|
|
| (1379666) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by arli3835 on Fri Jan 1 23:24:29 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Andrew Saucci on Fri Jan 1 21:41:21 2016. That is something that is being looked in to right now.. |
|
|
| (1379667) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by arli3835 on Fri Jan 1 23:24:53 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by randyo on Fri Jan 1 19:57:39 2016. Something that should be done! At the very least, 9 car trains should be ran. |
|
|
| (1379674) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by priya12 on Fri Jan 1 23:46:51 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Edwards! on Thu Dec 31 11:54:26 2015. Too complicated. The R's issues with unreliability will in part be fixed when SAS opens.Just extend the J to 9th Ave and be done with it. |
|
|
| (1379676) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Jan 1 23:50:08 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Jan 1 21:55:23 2016. In normal hour, it should always be fallback staffing. Crews need/deserve enough time to take a leak and relax for a couple of minutes. |
|
|
| (1379677) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Kevin from Midwood on Fri Jan 1 23:54:12 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by priya12 on Fri Jan 1 23:46:51 2016. Why? I see AM northbound R trains leaving DeKalb with empty seats. There doesn't seem to be a need for more service through the rathole. |
|
|
| (1379678) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sat Jan 2 00:04:15 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Fri Jan 1 20:17:48 2016. you are entitled to your opinion. You are NOT entitled to tell me I don't give a damn about train crews.My POV comes from trains operated in terminals with tracks as at 14th & 8th Ave and several of the BART stations. The train enters the station, doors open. Pax exit,doors close. In the BART case, the T/O keys a single door open , exits, locks. T/O walks the length of the train on the platform, keys a door, enters. In general pax enter at will through that door. just prior to departure, that door is closed, then all are opened, pax enter, doors close, train leaves. While I am well aware that criminals in NYC are much more agressive than in most of the SF Bay area, I don't see a need for the T/O or conductor to walk the interior. |
|
|
| (1379680) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Jan 2 00:11:37 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Jan 1 23:50:08 2016. You're supposed to get your fallback time regardless, it's in the contract. When you're short-relaying trains in rush, all the more critical there. Operations these days refuse to have enough meat to do the job and so they fall on contrivances to avoid the costs.Way back when, labor was your highest center. Now it's all that interest to the banksters. They should hire more meat. |
|
|
| (1379681) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Jan 2 00:13:26 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sat Jan 2 00:04:15 2016. Just so you're aware, here, most relays have to be done in a pocket somewhere to return the train to the departing platform. Stub terminals make it easier, but not all that many terminals are actually stubs. You have to relay and that's what Bill is talking about.Terminals are easy. Relaying on the railroad, as is done with many services, is not. |
|
|
| (1379683) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sat Jan 2 01:02:08 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Jan 2 00:13:26 2016. Okay, I get that taking the train into some non-public area is commo9n. Muni does that w/LRVs at Embarcadero. Dumb and costs several extra minutes minutes. Oh well. |
|
|
| (1379684) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sat Jan 2 01:52:35 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sat Jan 2 01:02:08 2016. A train that changes direction in the station does not to have passengers cleared off the train.A train that has to go beyond the station to change directions, like 168 St., 179 St., or Continental should be checked for all passengers off for the safety of the crew. |
|
|
| (1379686) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Jan 2 02:10:28 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sat Jan 2 01:52:35 2016. A lot of people don't really know how relays work. 205 is one of the few terminals where trains relay and there's no way around it, has to be done.So many 1 trains did 137 and the ferry, and it worked just fine to maintain service UNTIL the fumigation policies. On B division, there was the Kings Highway and other short turns and that worked through relays. Then of course, Smith 9th. LOL! All of those short turns went away though because of the fumigation policy, and folks just don't get why or what that is. At least at 205 before the policy changed, we usually had a switchman on the tail. I was lucky, I was 20 at the time I was there, but even I ran into a few nutcases that decided to give me some shit. At least I had my "convincer", the old arnine cast iron brake handle, but was lucky enough to never had to use it. :) And yeah, leaving an arnine in lap and pulling the handle was like, in the old movie "Love Story" never having to say you were sorry. It did release on the other end pretty reliably if you had to change ends in the relay alone. GLAD to see you, guy! Wish we could only encourage a few more road warriors to ignore the flack and help the kids know what it was once like. Soon I fear, our stories will be replaced by robots. |
|
|
| (1379687) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Jan 2 02:14:28 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sat Jan 2 01:02:08 2016. Yeah, sadly you have to play the ball where it lands. MTA caused service density to go to shit downtown because it was just too costly to maintain service.Like I mentioned to Bill (who already knew all this), taking just the 1 line on the IRT as an example - before the need to fumigate (thanks for cancelling all that mental treatment and using subways as the bed and breakfast) the 1 line had just about every other train going north to 137, relaying, and then heading back south. In addition, a few trains terminated at Dyckman, and would head around the curve, use the Y there and head back south as well. Now, everything has to join that conga line at 242 and well ... TS if your train is late, enjoy your tax cut. :( |
|
|
| (1379695) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Jan 2 07:23:44 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by randyo on Fri Jan 1 19:57:39 2016. Or make like South Ferry, and open only 5 cars. |
|
|
| (1379699) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Jan 2 09:51:41 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Jan 2 02:14:28 2016. But it's way cheaper to have T/Os hanging out at 137th (using a lag method) so that trains can be turned there without anyone walking the length of the train, as opposed to paying a T/O to go all the way up to 242nd and back to 137th. When a terminating train pulls into 137th, the T/O hanging out there enters the rear cab. Both T/Os can stay locked in their cabs as the train relays.The T/O that now ends up at the back of the new downtown train gets out at 137th after the relay, crosses over and gets into the back of the next uptown terminating train, and then becomes the actual T/O of that train as it goes back downtown. So the money argument doesn't hold water, and neither does the crew endangerment argument. They just don't seem to want to take passengers into a pocket sand maybe make them sit stranded there for 5 minutes. |
|
|
| (1379703) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sat Jan 2 09:58:52 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Jan 2 02:10:28 2016. Hey Kev, you never threatened anyone with a brake plug did you?:) |
|
|
| (1379704) | |
Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street? |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sat Jan 2 10:04:14 2016, in response to Re: W to Astoria/N and Q to 96th Street?, posted by arli3835 on Fri Jan 1 23:24:53 2016. Couple a 4-car set to a 5-car set and, voila! |
|
|
|
Page 7 of 15 |
||
