Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well, the thing is that when the SAS is built, one of the Broadway lines is going to have to go up to Second Avenue, leaving Astoria with just one line. The line is too busy just to have one route running along it, so that is why they will likely bring back the (W). Now, they could beef up (N) service, but the problem is that you'll end up with empty trains in Brooklyn.
As of now, everything is within loading guidelines: The Astoria Line has 2 services, so it isn't overcrowded, and the Broadway Line isn't really overcrowded. While it does suck to have to transfer to the (R)arely if you're going to Lower Manhattan, it's not the worst thing in the world.
I'm on a transit forum, and sometimes we discuss ways of improving service on the subway. The thing is that, living out in a subway-less area, it's kind of hard for me to feel much sympathy for subway riders who have to wait 10 minutes for a train, when most of the time, the buses I deal with run every 12-15 minutes, or less often. Now, I agree that it's great when everything connects well and you don't have to wait long, but unfortunately, the MTA doesn't have enough money for any service beyond what's required to handle the crowds or meet the minimum headways requirements (the time between trains). Now, they should try to make sure that the 10 minute wait doesn't become a 20 minute wait by dispatching the trains right, but aside from that, there isn't much they can do.
You're only worried about that religious group because you think they'll kill people if spoken ill of. An ad going the other way, protesting Israeli treatment of Palestinians for instance, would not have been much of an issue.
AIPAC would be all over that. Why do you think criticism of Israel is such a no-go topic in the US?
The W train, while it did provide additional service to Astoria, wasn't much of a plus otherwise. Running out of Astoria meant that there were two lines (N and W) both using a terminal station with only two tracks. That's what you call a logistical nightmare. Having the Q line go there only perpetuates that situation. The solution is to run more N trains, but only have that one line running to Ditmars Boulevard.
There! I'm only a tower operator, not an MTA Board Member wearing a suit and tie. But I happen to have a better knowledge of the railroad than they do--even though I don't get paid half a million dollars a year. (Who would've guessed; salary does not equal competence!)
Perhaps agreeing with Fred...instead of differently named trains running the same route in Astoria, why not just incease the number of N trains to compensate for traffic.
Perhaps too EASY or sensible for the MTA?
I suspect they hate sensible.
Anyhoo...PLEASE give me a nice new Second Avenue Train. Preferably in my lifetime.
Now, they should try to make sure that the 10 minute wait doesn't become a 20 minute wait by dispatching the trains right, but aside from that, there isn't much they can do.
I agree, but a lot of times delayed trains are no fault of dispatching. There's a lot of obstacles along the route of any given line that delay the train putting it further and further behind schedule. One big one that comes to mind is people holding the doors open, especially in rush hour.
Perhaps agreeing with Fred...instead of differently named trains running the same route in Astoria, why not just incease the number of N trains to compensate for traffic.
Perhaps too EASY or sensible for the MTA?
I suspect they hate sensible.
Anyhoo...PLEASE give me a nice new Second Avenue Train. Preferably in my lifetime.
Because the N is limited by interoperation with the Q on the Manhattan Bridge and D on the 4th Avenue Line. In general, there's a minimum headway of around 2 minutes between trains, so you're maxed to 4 minutes between N trains. So then the question becomes: "why not switch the N back to express service (which it should have stayed as, in my opinion) and increase R service?" Well, unfortunately, the R has the same problem as the M. So while I don't think the W was necessary, it had some sort of supplementary value. However, the Broadway Line needs more express rather than local service. At least the SAS will help relieve the confusion above Times Square.
[quote=makossa;26473502]I agree, but a lot of times delayed trains are no fault of dispatching. There's a lot of obstacles along the route of any given line that delay the train putting it further and further behind schedule. One big one that comes to mind is people holding the doors open, especially in rush hour.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
