|
|
| Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. (882716) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 2 of 12 |
||
|
| (882873) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Wed Jan 6 18:18:53 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 6 17:44:22 2010. Exactly. It didn't go to Manhattan, so that alone reduced ridership. 6-car G's caused congestion due to added dwell time. |
|
|
| (882874) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 6 18:23:47 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by LuchAAA on Wed Jan 6 18:18:53 2010. Yes, but the V goes to Manhattan, and they are far from crush loaded. It's not like all the people that jumped off by Queens Plaza do that with the V. |
|
|
| (882875) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 6 18:26:19 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Bill From Maspeth on Wed Jan 6 18:10:10 2010. Well then, that's the length of an 8 car 60 foot car V train...and that goes to Manhattan, unlike the G. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (882876) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Wed Jan 6 18:28:53 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 6 18:23:47 2010. But for the V to run in the Eastern Division, it will be shortened by two car lenghts, which will cause some crowding and increased dwell time as C/R's fight passengers who are jamming the doors b/c they were standing where the train does not stop so they run to the train as the doors are closing, causing delays. This was always a problem on the C.It was a problem on the G. I used to blow my horn entering busy stations like Woodhaven, and people looked, knew something was up, and ran to the middle of the platform before I stopped, knowing the G was short. This always saved time and trouble. |
|
|
| (882883) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Jan 6 18:55:07 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Bill From Maspeth on Wed Jan 6 18:11:32 2010. Yo. |
|
|
| (882886) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Jan 6 18:56:38 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 6 17:52:32 2010. I doubt you could take the entire M fleet and maintain current V headways on the combined route. Don't expect to use Z train sets, those will be needed for the J. |
|
|
| (882888) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Jan 6 18:58:49 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Bill From Maspeth on Wed Jan 6 17:51:13 2010. No it's not. The same number of trains will be running. It is a cut in maximum passanger capacity, not a problem for the V. |
|
|
| (882889) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Jan 6 19:00:32 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 6 18:26:19 2010. All a 480' "V" train would do is cause a few more standees between Queens Plaza and 5th Ave. That's the only segment that gets what anyone could call "crowding", even during rush hours. |
|
|
| (882890) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Wed Jan 6 19:08:49 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 6 18:26:19 2010. And it isn't the same. 450' is shorter than 480'. |
|
|
| (882891) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by G1Ravage on Wed Jan 6 19:10:35 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Railman718 on Wed Jan 6 14:02:31 2010. Oh my word...he may have passed out. |
|
|
| (882892) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Wed Jan 6 19:10:55 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Jan 6 18:56:38 2010. Z sets will probably stay on the Z. If they're cutting the M, I doubt they could cut service to the Nassau line.R32s could easily be used on the V or J/Z if needed. |
|
|
| (882893) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Jan 6 19:16:43 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by R30A on Wed Jan 6 19:10:55 2010. They want to get rid of the R32's. I am assuming that no SMEE cars will be available in the near future. |
|
|
| (882896) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Wed Jan 6 19:22:06 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by 33rd Street on Wed Jan 6 09:23:34 2010. If the V went to Church Av, it would be shorter than going all the way over to Euclid. |
|
|
| (882897) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 6 19:28:42 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Jan 6 19:16:43 2010. How do YOU know what "they" want? I'm calling your bluff and am going to say that right now "they" do not want to get rid of the R-32 cars. |
|
|
| (882898) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Wed Jan 6 19:28:45 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 6 18:26:19 2010. And it's not really going to overwhelm the V, it isn't filled to capacity. At least those 'left over trains' will be put to better use elsewhere. |
|
|
| (882899) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Wed Jan 6 19:30:26 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Jan 6 18:58:49 2010. "not a problem for the V."Exactly. |
|
|
| (882901) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Wed Jan 6 19:39:45 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by G1Ravage on Wed Jan 6 19:10:35 2010. lol. |
|
|
| (882905) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Wed Jan 6 19:48:54 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 6 17:59:48 2010. There is an argument that the M could be saved. The V (now a M/V combo) could run 6am to 11pm on the weekdays, while M-trains operated as a shuttle from 11pm to 6am, and on the weekends - between Myrtle Avenue and the Metropolitan Avenue terminal. Just a thought.Mike |
|
|
| (882906) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Wed Jan 6 19:55:32 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Michael549 on Wed Jan 6 19:48:54 2010. From the MTA's pov, it would probably be easier to just change the signs on the Brooklyn-Queens portion that is the current M with the V than all of Midtown and Queens Blvd to an Orange M as well as Brooklyn.But I do agree they should keep the M over the V. Perhaps they could keep the V to designate an 'express F'? Or perhaps a possible Queens Blvd-2nd Av service in the future? |
|
|
| (882907) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by mr_brian on Wed Jan 6 20:02:01 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 6 13:19:33 2010. OH SNAP |
|
|
| (882911) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by GrandAvenue on Wed Jan 6 20:21:34 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Grand Concourse on Wed Jan 6 19:39:45 2010. I'll believe this when I see it...sounds possible though and there are shots of a R160 signed up as a V to Metropolitan |
|
|
| (882914) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Dan Lawrence on Wed Jan 6 20:34:04 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 6 13:19:33 2010. Since he won't post it here, why don't you post his score? |
|
|
| (882916) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 6 20:39:02 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by mr_brian on Wed Jan 6 20:02:01 2010. shizam |
|
|
| (882917) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 6 20:42:37 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Dan Lawrence on Wed Jan 6 20:34:04 2010. It was already posted in the original thread. Why in the world would I be talking here like it is public knowledge if it isn't? Do you need me to link you to the original thread, or can you find it yourself? |
|
|
| (882921) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by error46146 on Wed Jan 6 20:47:39 2010, in response to ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Chipper10 on Wed Jan 6 09:16:26 2010. I doubt it. |
|
|
| (882922) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by 33rd Street on Wed Jan 6 20:49:57 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Grand Concourse on Wed Jan 6 19:22:06 2010. V to Chruch Avenue, hell no. V to Metropolitan, hell no. V to Euclid Avenue, hell yeah. |
|
|
| (882923) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by 33rd Street on Wed Jan 6 20:50:39 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 6 17:43:43 2010. As long as the V contines to serve 2nd Avenue, I'll be happy. |
|
|
| (882924) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Wed Jan 6 20:50:59 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by GrandAvenue on Wed Jan 6 20:21:34 2010. yes, it is possible, but it doesn't mean it will happen though. Those signs are programed for any possible route combos. |
|
|
| (882925) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Wed Jan 6 20:51:44 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by 33rd Street on Wed Jan 6 20:50:39 2010. Well, it looks as if it won't, based on the original post. |
|
|
| (882926) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Wed Jan 6 20:54:25 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 6 17:49:38 2010. I do agree about the M not being needed on Nassau St, but I guess I'm just losing interest in such an idea. I would rather the V run to CI [Culver express - bypassing the Park Slope stops] and the F terminating at Church to keep the F line shorter and hopefully more reliable like the E. |
|
|
| (882934) | |
Re: QUESTION: Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 6 21:08:06 2010, in response to Re: QUESTION: Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Fred G on Wed Jan 6 17:02:45 2010. Oh I saw that on the Arnines. I think I get it now. |
|
|
| (882937) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 6 21:11:00 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by R30A on Wed Jan 6 20:51:44 2010. Darn right. Sucks for him, eh? |
|
|
| (882938) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 6 21:12:06 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Grand Concourse on Wed Jan 6 20:54:25 2010. Huh? The F was darn reliable when I used to ride it. Those things came like every 2-3 minutes in the peak period. It was awesome. |
|
|
| (882940) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Avid Reader on Wed Jan 6 21:18:53 2010, in response to ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Chipper10 on Wed Jan 6 09:16:26 2010. Now if they could only punch that line from FreshPond Road through the Winthrop connection and back to ROOSEVELT AVE it could be the circle line!V clockwise, M counter clockwise! Just like under the Christmas Tree. avid |
|
|
| (882943) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Andrew Saucci on Wed Jan 6 21:36:24 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 6 17:46:19 2010. "It wasn't a 'mistake' at all."That's right-- just because it isn't normally used in revenue service doesn't mean it was a mistake. |
|
|
| (882955) | |
Re: QUESTION: Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by ntrainride on Wed Jan 6 22:31:27 2010, in response to QUESTION: Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by ebtmikado on Wed Jan 6 12:33:41 2010. זה הולך קוני איילנד |
|
|
| (882961) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by 33rd Street on Wed Jan 6 23:15:26 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 6 21:11:00 2010. What does that supposed to mean? |
|
|
| (882962) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 6 23:21:58 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Bob Andersen on Wed Jan 6 09:59:39 2010. The move makes COMPLETE sense!! It combines two lines where it easily benefits both, and takes a TON of pressure off the L train. |
|
|
| (882963) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 6 23:24:56 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 6 17:43:43 2010. Exactly!!The only difference is now it will go to Essex Street instead of 2nd Avenue, and then go Brooklyn via the Willy B. This will take MAJOR pressure off the L train in Brooklyn. |
|
|
| (882964) | |
Re: Replacing the M with V train |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 6 23:30:31 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by 33rd Street on Wed Jan 6 20:49:57 2010. That is for after the Culver Viaduct work is complete in 2012-'13, when I would have the V go to Euclid and the C to Church Avenue.This combo route is something that is SORELY needed now. |
|
|
| (882965) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by 33rd Street on Wed Jan 6 23:31:36 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 6 23:21:58 2010. No it doesn't. Combining the M and V lines would be the worse thing the MTA ever did since the creation of the JFK Express. There is nothing wrong with the current V and M line routings. The only two factors that would ease the L line's overcrowding would to have the M terminate at Chambers Street on weekends, and additional service on the J line.One idea that would make the V line even more useful is to extend it to Avenue C & East Houston Street. I bet you that ridership would drop on the M14 and in turn would help out the L line greatly in Manhattan. |
|
|
| (882966) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by 33rd Street on Wed Jan 6 23:32:13 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 6 23:24:56 2010. Just shut up. |
|
|
| (882968) | |
Re: Replacing the M with V train |
|
|
Posted by 33rd Street on Wed Jan 6 23:33:31 2010, in response to Re: Replacing the M with V train, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 6 23:30:31 2010. No it isn't. Read this post. |
|
|
| (882970) | |
Re: Replacing the M with V train |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Wed Jan 6 23:37:12 2010, in response to Re: Replacing the M with V train, posted by 33rd Street on Wed Jan 6 23:33:31 2010. But the post you link to is nearly entirely wrong. The M-V combination would certainly relieve the L, and would save money in a time in which money needs to be saved, while at the same time, only inconveniencing a small minority of current V/M riders. There is almost no downside at all. |
|
|
| (882971) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Wed Jan 6 23:37:48 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by 33rd Street on Wed Jan 6 23:32:13 2010. Why should he? He is entirely correct! |
|
|
| (882972) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 6 23:42:45 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 6 18:05:48 2010. And on weekends, until the R was moved to Queens Blvd., you ONLY had the G trains operating local on weekends on QB.Perhaps with this combo, it also will warrant having the V become a seven-day-a-week route. As noted, this really takes pressure off the L, so a "service cut" on the V on QB is MORE than offset by taking pressure off the L and giving Broadway Brooklyn riders a one-seat ride on 6th Avenue. |
|
|
| (882974) | |
Re: Replacing the M with V train |
|
|
Posted by 33rd Street on Thu Jan 7 00:00:41 2010, in response to Re: Replacing the M with V train, posted by R30A on Wed Jan 6 23:37:12 2010. Come back to me when you've lived in the East Village for twenty years. Combining the M and V lines would be a mistake. |
|
|
| (882975) | |
Re: Replacing the M with V train |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu Jan 7 00:01:54 2010, in response to Re: Replacing the M with V train, posted by R30A on Wed Jan 6 23:37:12 2010. There's no way you can be so right and he can be so wrong. It's impossible. He's usually right. He's hasn't been talking nonsense for the last year or so. |
|
|
| (882978) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by 33rd Street on Thu Jan 7 00:04:10 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 6 23:42:45 2010. As noted, this really takes pressure off the L, so a "service cut" on the V on QB is MORE than offset by taking pressure off the L and giving Broadway Brooklyn riders a one-seat ride on 6th Avenue.So you would rather have the Queens Boulevard line overcrowded than to ease over crowding along the L line? If Broadway-Brooklyn riders want 6th Avenue service so bad, then why don't they transfer at Essex Street for the F line. |
|
|
| (882979) | |
Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train. |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu Jan 7 00:04:38 2010, in response to Re: ZMan, that is great news, replacing the M train with the V train., posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 6 23:42:45 2010. Wally, please tell me how much you're loving this. |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 12 |
||
