|
|
| Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure (1392515) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 5 of 7 |
||
|
| (1394027) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 30 13:02:39 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Sat Apr 30 02:05:02 2016. I get where you're coming from, but as said, the car shortage and being able to use fewer trains overall without potentially royally screwing up other lines because of an unruly passenger or a massive conga line that is well known is why I would have the split and have the (T) run to 96th/2nd.It may also turn out to be a case where such is needed anyway as the main purpose of the (Q) on the SAS is to take pressure off the (6). By the time the (M) comes back online as we know it, this split of the (M) as it is now and the (T) to 96th/2nd may be needed anyway as I suspect the (Q) will get much greater ridership from those tired of taking the (6), especially if they have to work on the west side of midtown anyway (and some on the east side might still do the (Q) to the (S) or (7) to avoid the 4/5/6 crowds, especially if they work at either of the extreme ends of the massive 42nd-Street-Grand Central stop (3rd or Madison Avenues). |
|
|
| (1394028) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 30 13:12:59 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by AlM on Sat Apr 30 09:56:49 2016. Exactly!!That is why I have OOS transfers at Broadway on the (G) to the Lorimer and Hewes Street J/M/Z stations AND from Fulton Street on the (G) to Lafayette Avenue on the (C) and Atlantic-Barclays on the 2/3/4/5/B/D/N/Q/R, also encouraging those looking for lower Manhattan to take the (G) to Hoyt-Schermerhorn for the A/C there. The idea is to discourage people from going to Court Square as much as possible as there will be those who need to go there anyway. That's also why the only way for any additional service on QB to work in my opinion would be to extend the (G) (M) and (R) all to 179th with the (F) running express its whole route (and select local trains as needed after Parsons Boulevard moved to the express track if there is a logjam on the local) as I do think it's possible you may need the (G) to also stop at Queens Plaza to allow people to switch to the (R) that I would also having running its full route 24/7 during the (L) shutdown (and the N/W as noted via a new OOS transfer at Queenboro Plaza). The conga line at 71-Continental is notorious as it is and any additional service on the local to there likely makes that worse. |
|
|
| (1394029) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 30 13:14:39 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by AlM on Sat Apr 30 09:51:23 2016. Or at least Myrtle.Lorimer is vital in this. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1394030) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 30 13:18:28 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Joe V on Sat Apr 30 06:43:53 2016. Yes, and I think loading guides are going to warrant doing that.There are a lot of people who either are tired of riding the (6) or don't use the Lexington Avenue line at all on the UES because it is so overcrowded. I suspect the (Q) will be far more heavily used than some think and that's why I also would have the (M) split into (M) and (T) with the (T) to 96th/2nd as that to me will work, especially during off-hours given the dense population of the UES. And it's NOT just "yuppies" (a term really last used in the early '90s) either. |
|
|
| (1394031) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Apr 30 13:21:55 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 30 13:14:39 2016. You can't realistically turn a train at Myrtle from the east. It's a triple maneuver. |
|
|
| (1394032) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 30 14:13:51 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by AlM on Sat Apr 30 13:21:55 2016. Right. Point is, that the line has to AT LEAST go to there, which realistically means it has to go to Lorimer. |
|
|
| (1394048) | |
Split M/T train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 30 16:12:42 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 30 12:52:37 2016. Obviously, I meant the (T), not (M) in the last post |
|
|
| (1394063) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Apr 30 19:04:56 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Apr 29 22:57:52 2016. One of the problems which nobody seems to have addressed as far as I can recall is that there is really no capacity on 6 Ave for enough additional lcl service to serve the SAS sufficiently as well as Qns Blvd. If you were to route enough trains up the SAS to make it worthwhile, then service to Queens would have to be reduced which is not acceptable. |
|
|
| (1394064) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Apr 30 19:13:28 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by AlM on Sat Apr 30 13:21:55 2016. Actually, you can, but I wouldn’t recommend it since it involves turning trains back from the mainline similarly to 57/6. A N/B train can enter Myrtle, discharge and pick up and return south through the middle track which now has a switch to the S/B tk. |
|
|
| (1394069) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Apr 30 19:29:04 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by randyo on Sat Apr 30 19:04:56 2016. Northbound AM rush there are about 14 Fs and 8 Ms. There's room for some more Ms. They aren't about to go to 96th, of course. |
|
|
| (1394070) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Apr 30 19:30:30 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by randyo on Sat Apr 30 19:13:28 2016. Ah, I have Peter's track map from ca 2000. |
|
|
| (1394073) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Apr 30 19:43:56 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by AlM on Sat Apr 30 19:29:04 2016. 53rd Street line is 15 E + 8 M.That can handle 7 more. |
|
|
| (1394074) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Apr 30 19:51:38 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Joe V on Sat Apr 30 19:43:56 2016. Exactly. As can the 6th Ave local track. |
|
|
| (1394075) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Apr 30 19:53:06 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by AlM on Sat Apr 30 19:51:38 2016. Continental Ave fumigation is another matter, but there is the under-used express track to 179th. |
|
|
| (1394105) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sun May 1 03:25:47 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by randyo on Sat Apr 30 19:04:56 2016. My plan keeps the (M) where it currently is in terms of TPH at peak times with the (T) doubling total service between Metropolitan and 47-50 outside of peak hours on weekdays. The (T) never goes above usually 5-7 TPH at any one time because it's also on a 2/1 split with the (Q) during peak hours in this format.The (T) is designed to supplement the (M) on weekdays and absorb its late night and weekend shuttles, running the same 5-7 TPH it would at all times on weekdays and weekends while during all overnights runs 3 TPH. The (M) would be unchanged from how its run now, the (T) simply is the supplemental line that goes to the UES where it there supplements the (Q) and gives UES riders a direct 6th Avenue connection. |
|
|
| (1394158) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Sun May 1 13:38:47 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 30 13:12:59 2016. Who says that Wallyhorse can not tear up the subway map in order to deal with just one problem?Let's see: - He's extended the M-train via a "T" route to 96th Street/Second Avenue - He's extended G, M, & R trains to 179th Street/Queens - He's made F-trains the full-1970's type express route along Queens Blvd, but alao with the E-train as express - He's fumbled back and forth on extending the C-train along both Brooklyn/Broadway line, and the F-train McDonald Avenue line, as well as extending the E-train along the Brooklyn IND Fulton Street line. - He's fumbled back and forth on extending the M-train to 168th Street-Washington Heights. - He's fumbled back and forth on extending or re-routing L-trains or Canarsie trains along Brooklyn Broadway, several times. I know that I'm missing a couple of his latest plans and ideas, and that this is just his "greatest hits" listing. You have to hand to Wallyhorse - his come back spirit says that no matter how not defensible or unlikely some of his ideas are - he will return with either a new idea or an idea that has been re-hatched from a prior plan. At least he leaves the "number" lines alone, most of the time. Mike |
|
|
| (1394171) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun May 1 17:44:38 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Sun May 1 03:25:47 2016. You don’t seem to understand the vagaries of scheduling. Adding extra trains for the one service an easily be accomplished by adjusting then headway to clear the various services that the line will interact with. Adding a separate service which should have a relatively even headway to be effective won’t work since it would be difficult if not impossible to properly space the alternate service. |
|
|
| (1394174) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sun May 1 18:15:11 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by randyo on Sun May 1 17:44:38 2016. Like I said, the (T) is a supplement during the week and the primary service on weekends.Do I expect it to be perfect? NO! The headways might not be even between the (M) and the (T), but the main purpose of doing this is to both supplement the (M) (during the week) and also provide UES riders with a 6th Avenue option that I think will be needed, especially in off-peak hours due to the population density of the UES. The (L) gets relief in the fact there would ALWAYS be a service operating to 47-50 on 6th Avenue and in this case then going to the east side at 53rd on weekdays (M) and 57th/6th and 63rd/Lex at all times (T) and in the latter case continuing to the UES and the many high-rises and other businesses I'm sure some who live along the line work at, taking pressure off the (6) in particular. |
|
|
| (1394181) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sun May 1 19:30:32 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Michael549 on Sun May 1 13:38:47 2016. Well, the facts are:You have an extremely densely populated area known as the Upper East Side that I think will be using the (Q) far more heavier than anyone realizes to where I think you will need something like the (T) that is really half of a split (M). The Canarsie Tunnel shutdown is going to be a major issue. The idea to me is to spread out the pain as much as possible to prevent overcrowding at Court Square by getting people to use various alternate routes. CBTC likely still going on over on QB when the (L) tunnel shutdown happens. That likely would force the (M) otherwise to 96th/2nd on weekends anyway and those on the UES would likely demand that be done at all times. That's why the split of M/T as I would do it even if it makes things difficult. |
|
|
| (1394182) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sun May 1 19:44:32 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Sun May 1 19:30:32 2016. You have an extremely densely populated area known as the Upper East Side that I think will be using the (Q) far more heavier than anyone realizes to where I think you will need something like the (T) that is really half of a split (M).If the Q is crush loaded NYCT will do something to address it. If that were to happen, in contrast to all the evidence to the contrary, I think it's more likely to be a handful of trains to/from Whitehall than to/from Bway Jct. |
|
|
| (1394207) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sun May 1 21:07:45 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by AlM on Sun May 1 19:44:32 2016. The idea is it would be a split (M)/(T) because that also gives UES riders a 6th Avenue option they don't have. As said, to me that is the way to do because it also guarantees Broadway-Brooklyn riders not having to switch at any point to the (F) at Essex-Delancey for 6th Avenue service or having to ride to Canal for the Broadway Line or the (6) for instance.What the (T) via 6th avenue to 96th/2nd does is beside helping the displaced (L) riders is take pressure off the (6) at Broadway-Lafayette among other things. |
|
|
| (1394229) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Mon May 2 10:43:43 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by randyo on Sat Apr 30 19:04:56 2016. This is why I have been saying add 5tph on the (M) from Canarsie to Forest Hills. Continental certainly used to be able to handle that many trains. If it is an issue today, send alternating, or all, peak (M) on to Union Tpk, Parsons, or 179th to keep Continental moving.What Wallyhorse refuses to accept is that a handful of tph via Chrystie won't do much of anything for his downtrodden, deprived, UES peeps. If they are in that much of a hurry to get to a 6th Avenue destination, they are not going to tolerate waiting as long as to 12-20 minutes for "the orange train" just to avoid taking "the yellow train" and walking a few feet across the platform at Lex for "the other orange train." If it is going via Chrystie, it not going to the UES. |
|
|
| (1394230) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Mon May 2 10:53:23 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 30 03:06:58 2016. No. With proper staffing in place on the platform at Continental and whatever up-line station is chosen as an auxiliary peak terminal, fumigation will not be a major factor. Sending alternating or selected trains in-service up the line will keep things moving at Continental. Those extra tph complement, not drastically alter or disrupt, the existing service patterns. |
|
|
| (1394232) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Mon May 2 11:11:34 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 30 03:16:50 2016. What part of "Stop screwing with the map for your testicular delight" are you incapable of comprehending and accepting?THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO LEGITIMATE REASON TO DISRUPT EXISTING ROUTES.Changing the terminals of the (C) and (E) would force major (if not complete) rescheduling of the 6th and 8th Avenue lines. That doesn't include car requirements. Add 5-6 tph peak to the existing (M) route, either from Met or, ideally, Canarsie. Off-peak, 3 or 4 on the extended service. Run that 15-18/7. (Or, 18-24/7 if the (L) can't run to Lorimer.) The trainsets come straight from the idled (L) sets. Solved. |
|
|
| (1394233) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Mon May 2 11:13:44 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Sun May 1 19:30:32 2016. "The idea to me is to spread out the pain as much as possible . . ."YOU DO REMEMBER THE LAST TIME "YOU" SAID THAT AT A COMMUNITY BOARD MEETING, RIGHT? Ha! Ha! Ha! Mike |
|
|
| (1394234) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Mon May 2 11:18:13 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 30 13:02:39 2016. There is no car shortage for 3-6tph on the (M). Those trainsets will come directly from the idled (L) units. Not even equipment moves are needed. Press a few buttons and they are magically (M) or <M> Continental Av/Rockaway Pky. |
|
|
| (1394235) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon May 2 11:35:38 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Mon May 2 11:18:13 2016. Exactly.And if they are feeling stingy and can solve the operational problems, they will run them Bway Jct to Queens Plaza. |
|
|
| (1394245) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by terRAPIN station on Mon May 2 13:28:15 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Michael549 on Mon May 2 11:13:44 2016. He did? You saw him say that? |
|
|
| (1394246) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Mon May 2 13:29:35 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Apr 30 03:16:50 2016. It's not, actually. His proposal takes a few L trains and reroutes them onto the Broadway el and the 6th Ave local to Queens. Your proposal adds extra merging at West 4th St, overwhelms the Cranberry St Tunnel with A and E trains, over-serves the Fulton St local stops with said E trains and would force the World Trade Center E platform to be shut down (and please do NOT say "supplemental K train," like you have before!). Why would there even be a need for ALL THREE 8th Ave services at Broadway Junction (C on the el; A and E in the subway)? Why wouldn't there be a need (or desire) for a 6th Ave service at Broadway Junction? |
|
|
| (1394247) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Mon May 2 13:39:55 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by AlM on Mon May 2 11:35:38 2016. As I have said before, QP would be workable for nights/weekends; not peak. Bway Jct is also viable. Ridership on the Canarsie segment will ultimately determine what the service pattern on it will be. I have a hunch, however, that if one-seat midtown service was offered for a good chunk of the day, it would prove hugely popular. |
|
|
| (1394266) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Mon May 2 15:41:54 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Mon May 2 10:43:43 2016. You're missing the point:The real purpose of having the (T) to 96th/2nd is off-peak, NOT peak hours. That's why there would be no increase in (T) service during peak hours with the idea being a 2/1 split during peak hours between the (Q) and (T) and during other hours on weekday daytime a 3/2 split and evenings, weekends and overnights a 1/1 split. The (T) is a supplemental line in this manner during peak hours and then is a more even split off-peak hours where the (T) runs to 96th/2nd with the (Q) while the (M) runs as it does now at all times (doubling the service from Metropolitan Avenue at all times, especially outside of peak hours on weekdays) and the (T) is the line from Metropolitan late nights and weekends. |
|
|
| (1394268) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon May 2 15:48:50 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Mon May 2 15:41:54 2016. The real purpose of having the (T) to 96th/2nd is off-peak, NOT peak hours.If the UES happens to need more service off hours, they'll just run more Qs for longer. If 96th Street needs more service than Coney Island, they'll run some Qs from Whitehall to 96th. It will be very surprising if off hour passengers can fill more than 8 Q trains per hour. |
|
|
| (1394269) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Mon May 2 15:59:06 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by AlM on Mon May 2 15:48:50 2016. 6tph off-peak is probably more like it. |
|
|
| (1394271) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Mon May 2 16:05:28 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Mon May 2 15:41:54 2016. Now you want it off-peak? Earlier you were insisting during peak because Continental couldn't turn them.What's your next Super Brain reroute idea? Send the (7) to Brighton Beach via Montague? |
|
|
| (1394280) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Mon May 2 17:44:05 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by terRAPIN station on Mon May 2 13:28:15 2016. It was a post he did doing a mock-up if I actually did that (you saw that post in another thread on this when that went down). |
|
|
| (1394283) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Mon May 2 18:14:23 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Mon May 2 15:41:54 2016. Yes, well, off-peak service on the three UES stations of the SAS shouldn't trump the needs of displaced L line riders - peak and off-peak - who will face longer journey times, longer waits at their stations, crowded transfer points to other lines and crowded alternate trains. There should be more 6th Ave service added for passengers transferring at Court Sq, not on the SAS to placate prep-school kids and Yuppies. |
|
|
| (1394287) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by TerrApin Station on Mon May 2 18:52:53 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Mon May 2 17:44:05 2016. Ok... |
|
|
| (1394292) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Mon May 2 20:07:10 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Mon May 2 16:05:28 2016. From a previous message:"Send the (7) to Brighton Beach via Montague?" Please, please do not give Wallyhorse any ideas of messing with the #7 trains! Or ANY of the number lines!! LOL! Mike |
|
|
| (1394303) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Mon May 2 20:43:01 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Mon May 2 15:59:06 2016. We are talking about the ONE area where a lot of that may get thrown out the window.The idea is you would during non-peak hours have 5-6 (Q) and 5-6 (T) trains per hour and late nights, 3 of each per hour (and maybe more on the (T)). You likely even outside of peak hours will need 10-12 combined (M) and (T) trains per hour on weekdays to handle the (L) crowds that as many know has been prone to be jammed at Midnight-1:00 AM and that actually could require 4-6 TPH on the (T) even in the late night hours and 7-9 (T) TPH on weekends to handle the (L) crowds (with yes, the (T) actually running more TPH on weekends than during the week). As said, the main purposes of this (T) is to supplement the (M) during the week and replace the weekend (M) shuttles (late nights and especially) on weekends when CBTC work likely makes it impossible most of the time for the (M) to operate on QB. The UES from when I have been through there even late at night is often still very crowded and likely would warrant doing this. |
|
|
| (1394307) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Mon May 2 20:58:23 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Michael549 on Mon May 2 20:07:10 2016. LOL!!!Again, the real purpose of the (M) / (T) split is to have the (M) and (T) operate on weekdays during off-peak hours on a 1/1 split. During PEAK hours, as designed the (M) likely operates at its current 8 TPH and the (T) operates at 5-7 TPH depending on how much additional capacity 6th avenue and the SAS can handle after the (Q) runs its 12-14 TPH at peak. The breakdown as I would have it from Metropolitan Avenue: PEAK hours: 8 (M) TPH to 71st-Continental 5-7 (T) TPH to 96th/2nd (actual number depends on capacity constraints both on 6th Avenue and the SAS) Weekday off-peak hours: 6 (M) TPH to 71-Continental 6 (T) TPH to 96th Street/2nd Avenue Late Nights: Sunday-Thursday: 3-5 (T) TPH to 96th Street/2nd Avenue depending on ridership demands during the (L) shutdown (especially given the (L)'s notoriously being overcrowded even at Midnight-1:00 AM) Friday-Saturday: 4-6 TPH to 96th Street/2nd Avenue until 3:00 AM, after 3:00 AM (until 8:00 AM Saturday and 9:30 AM Sunday) 3-5 TPH depending on demands. Weekends, excluding late nights: 7-9 TPH to 96th Street/2nd Avenue to meet demands from the (L) during the (L) shutdown. The additional trains also note the likelihood of QB being unavailable most weekends due to CBTC work that likely will still be ongoing at that point making it impossible to run the (M) to 71-Continental during that time. That's how I would do it. |
|
|
| (1394308) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Mon May 2 21:08:03 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Mon May 2 18:14:23 2016. As said, I agree, except you have that one major issue known as CBTC that likely makes QB unavailable to the (M) on weekends as that will likely be still going on during the (L) shutdown.The original idea of this was to have the (M) go to 96th/2nd on weekends only due to the CBTC situation once the (L) is shut down. It was then pointed out by others that UES residents would likely insist such a line be available on weekdays as well, which is where I came up with the (M) / (T) split that I broke down in another post. That is also why I came up with the OOS transfers to/from the (G) at Broadway (to the Broadway-Brooklyn Line) and at Fulton to mainly the 2/3/4/5/B/D/N/Q/R at Atlantic-Barclays (with perhaps a limited number of express shuttle buses that would operate non-stop between Myrtle-Wyckoff and Atlantic-Barclays to encourage people to go that route), with the main purpose being keeping as many people away from Court Square as possible. It's also why I said what might have to happen if you have ANY additional service on QB would be to have the (G) (M) and (R) ALL be extended to 179th Street so (G) riders can get the (R) to Manhattan (that I would have running 24/7 during the (L) shutdown) at Queens Plaza and avoid the massive conga line situation at 71-Continental. |
|
|
| (1394310) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Mon May 2 21:18:27 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Mon May 2 10:53:23 2016. I would not be doing that. If you're going to do that, then I would simply extend the (G) (M) and (R) to 179 so (G) passengers can switch to/from the (R) at Queens Plaza.As said, the other reason I do the (M) / (T) split besides the CBTC on weekends issue is to also be able to use fewer trainsets on an (M) / (T) split. Even if that split only saves one extra train (eight cars) that can be used elsewhere, it's worth doing. |
|
|
| (1394311) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Mon May 2 21:23:36 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Mon May 2 11:11:34 2016. Yes, but the problem is WEEKENDS.As said, one of the reasons I do it the way I do is the fact that QB likely will be unavailable to the (M) then due to CBTC work. Originally, I did that by having the (M) go weekends only to 96th/2nd until it was pointed out by others that UES riders would likely insist on such also being on weekdays and THAT's why I do the (M)/(T) split even if that is more complicated. This is where the complicated way of doing is more likely correct due to politics. I would think the Manhattan Borough President (who is already insisting on the (L) continuing to operate in Manhattan between 1st and 8th Avenues during the shutdown as noted in other forums) would likely demand if the (M) went to 96th/2nd on weekends it also went there on weekdays. That does in this case play into this. |
|
|
| (1394312) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Mon May 2 21:26:22 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Mon May 2 13:29:35 2016. As said, given what (L) riders were demanding, that at the time could have been a case of placating to them (and I should note, during peak hours the (E) would still have select trains, including all to/from 179 begin/end at Chambers in that original scenario and the Chambers Street platorm near the WTC would remain open at all times).Since then, I scaled that idea back to doing that on WEEKENDS when there are far fewer trains in the system overall. |
|
|
| (1394314) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Mon May 2 21:28:27 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Mon May 2 13:39:55 2016. Oh I agree, which was why I had the (C) idea in the first place (since scaled back to doing that on weekends only).The main reason for the (M) / (T) split I already said in other posts. |
|
|
| (1394315) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Mon May 2 22:03:00 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Mon May 2 21:23:36 2016. Again with the pols? Brewer can't do shit about how the MTA runs the trains during the shutdown because she has NO CONTROL over the MTA's operations or its budget. She has no control over anything really, given that (as I've already said) she's basically a figurehead politician. She can insist all she wants. No one at the MTA will have to listen to her. |
|
|
| (1394319) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Mon May 2 22:09:35 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Mon May 2 21:18:27 2016. Once again, it is both counter-productive and wasteful to extend the G, M and R trains to 179th St, just so G riders can have a transfer to the R at Queens Plaza. |
|
|
| (1394320) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Mon May 2 22:19:50 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Mon May 2 20:43:01 2016. No. You do not get to keep coming up with ever more nonsensical notions for SAS via Christie. SAS does not need more service at this time. Modifications to the (M) are EXCLUSIVELY for supporting (L) and 53rd St service at Court Sq. Nothing you keep babbling about will do so. |
|
|
| (1394321) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Mon May 2 22:24:16 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Wallyhorse on Mon May 2 20:58:23 2016. Again, you are attempting to divert service from where it must be provided. SAS is not part of the 53rd Street routing. Why won't you man up and accept that? |
|
|
| (1394322) | |
Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Mon May 2 22:24:55 2016, in response to Re: (M) train during (L) tunnel closure, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Mon May 2 22:19:50 2016. Give up the fight like I did.We're going to be discussing this till whenever it starts in 2019? It's not like NYCT is going to listen to anybody here. They will have a plan that will best utilize equipment availability both for subway cars and buses. |
|
|
|
Page 5 of 7 |
||
