Comments on: Brooklyn riders want some ‘F’-ing express service

By: Michael Sherrell

Michael Sherrell — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 19:58:10 +0000

When this issue has been discussed on other transit forums, I have alway suggested that the V-train become the express route. One – the F-train has a higher frequency of service, and the major reason why the F-train is local in Brooklyn is because of Park Slope residents who complained about the less frequent local service when some F-trains did run express in the 1970′s so why create a similar situation. Two – the V-train does not run all the time, so when the V-train ends so does express service, no fuss or confusion. Three – ending the V-train as an express at Kings Highway is do-able now, no new for new signals, switches etc. Four – The V-train and F-train are similar in Manhattan until 47-50th Streets – no real change for most riders. Five – If the B train can be local along the Bronx and Central Park West – and then express on Sixth AVenue and express along the Brighton line — the V-train can be local in Queens and Manhattan and express in Brooklyn. The route is still serving the needs of the riders. All of this will however have to wait for the renovation of the Culver viaduct, and an increase in subway cars, money and manpower.

By: Justin

Justin — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 04:36:31 +0000

In Queens, the V is the Queens Blvd Local while the F is the Queens Blvd Express. It would make totally no sense for the V to be the express in Brooklyn for the F, when it serves as the local for the F in Queens. The V returns Weekdays from 6am to 12am. So run the V to church Avenue as the local. The F can be express from church avenue to jay street. When the V isn’t running, switch the F to the local tracks.

This is the system done in most of the city. In Queens, when the V and R locals are unavailable, the E express switches to the local tracks. When the C local isn’t running in Manhattan and Brooklyn, the A express runs local.

Late at night, the 2 and 4 trains in Manhattan run local though the 1 and 6 locals remain in service.

At night, when the R, and W locals aren’t running, the N express runs local.

By: Last hours to sign the F train petition « Second Ave. Sagas | Blogging the NYC Subways

Tue, 26 Jun 2007 21:30:14 +0000

[...] Gary Reilly of Brooklyn Streets created the petition a few weeks back. I analyzed his plan two weeks ago and reiterated my support [...]

By: Petition for F express service picking up steam « Second Ave. Sagas | Blogging the NYC Subways

Fri, 22 Jun 2007 04:59:51 +0000

[...] along the unused express tracks on Brooklyn’s Culver line, the movement, while presenting a very feasible plan, had yet to gain steam. Well, the last nine days have seen a whirlwind of attention, and what began [...]

By: Aaron Donovan

Aaron Donovan — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 02:03:40 +0000

Great report Ben. Thanks for the info. The Sea Beach Line has the same unused track capacity for express service. Hopefully that could also be revived one day.

By: Gary

Gary — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 19:23:08 +0000

Second what Ben said above.

Switching at Jay Street for an express is not too great a cross to bear.

Also, over 1,000 signatures now. Now, up to the thread above to discuss Silver’s atrocious idea.

By: Benjamin Kabak

Benjamin Kabak — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 18:07:01 +0000

Thanks, Mike.

My mistake. The station’s been abandoned and is in a state of extreme disrepair. They could run express service without fixing it up as they have done on the weekends when F trains skip the stops in between 7th Ave and Jay St. I’m not convinced that they need to repair the station to have viable express service.

As for the F Express/V Express ideas: It’s semantics really. Express service would operate at peak hours from 2nd Ave. in Manhattan to Church Ave. in Brooklyn. Call it the F; call it the V. It doesn’t matter. One train will run express, the other local.

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 18:04:08 +0000

The lower level at Bergen Street was indeed used back when there was express service on this line.

By: Scott

Scott — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 13:54:36 +0000

Marc is correct – the F should remain local and V extended to to church as an express. Another reason why they should use this service pattern is that the F train has a higher frequency than the V – meaning if the V were made the local train, local stops would actually see a decrease in their service.

The V should run express to Church avenue during the week and extend to Kings highway in peak direction for rush hours (this would, I believe) require the installation of some new switches at Kings Hwy). Also, the G should be extended permanently to Church avenue. There is an underground four track yard south of Church Ave allowing G and V trains to turn around and not interfere with other service.

By: Marc Shepherd

Marc Shepherd — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 12:53:19 +0000

I am fairly certain that the Rutgers Street Tunnel is not at capacity, and it could accommodate two services, much as the Cranberry Street Tunnel does with the A/C.

The one flaw in your proposal is that the V should be express in Brooklyn, not the F. The reason is that the V isn’t going to be a 24×7 train. The Culver Line may need express service, but it doesn’t need express service all night long.

It is much easier and less confusing if the F maintains its present service pattern, which would operate at all times. The V, when it operates in Brooklyn, would provide the express service. Also, people who continue to ride the F would have nothing new to learn.