Comments on: Getting to the root of the Culver Viaduct Rehabilitation plan http://secondavenuesagas.com/2007/08/30/getting-to-the-root-of-the-culver-viaduct-rehabilitation-plan/ A New York City Subway Blog Sun, 21 Mar 2010 05:18:33 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9 hourly 1 By: Smith-9th St. F/G stop to be out for a year at Second Ave. Sagas | Blogging the NYC Subways http://secondavenuesagas.com/2007/08/30/getting-to-the-root-of-the-culver-viaduct-rehabilitation-plan/#comment-2033 Smith-9th St. F/G stop to be out for a year at Second Ave. Sagas | Blogging the NYC Subways Thu, 25 Oct 2007 14:42:03 +0000 http://secondavenuesagas.com/2007/08/30/getting-to-the-root-of-the-culver-viaduct-rehabilitation-plan/#comment-2033 [...] the MTA starts work on the Culver viaduct rehabilitation plan, the F/G station at Smith-9th Sts. that serves Carroll Garden, Gowanus and Red Hook. Metro guesses [...] [...] the MTA starts work on the Culver viaduct rehabilitation plan, the F/G station at Smith-9th Sts. that serves Carroll Garden, Gowanus and Red Hook. Metro guesses [...]

]]> By: F Express Plan on the tracks to nowhere at Second Ave. Sagas | Blogging the NYC Subways http://secondavenuesagas.com/2007/08/30/getting-to-the-root-of-the-culver-viaduct-rehabilitation-plan/#comment-1866 F Express Plan on the tracks to nowhere at Second Ave. Sagas | Blogging the NYC Subways Tue, 23 Oct 2007 18:48:06 +0000 http://secondavenuesagas.com/2007/08/30/getting-to-the-root-of-the-culver-viaduct-rehabilitation-plan/#comment-1866 [...] we’ve heard for some time now, due to wor on the Culver Viaduct, the F Express train won’t be a feasible alternative until 2012 or thereabouts. While the MTA [...] [...] we’ve heard for some time now, due to wor on the Culver Viaduct, the F Express train won’t be a feasible alternative until 2012 or thereabouts. While the MTA [...]

]]> By: Alon Levy http://secondavenuesagas.com/2007/08/30/getting-to-the-root-of-the-culver-viaduct-rehabilitation-plan/#comment-1269 Alon Levy Mon, 03 Sep 2007 06:29:12 +0000 http://secondavenuesagas.com/2007/08/30/getting-to-the-root-of-the-culver-viaduct-rehabilitation-plan/#comment-1269 I just looked at some subway schedules, and saw that express lines save very little time. On average, an additional station in a train's way adds 40 seconds in dwell time plus the time it takes to decelerate and then accelerate again. Overall express service rarely saves more than 10 minutes. I just looked at some subway schedules, and saw that express lines save very little time. On average, an additional station in a train’s way adds 40 seconds in dwell time plus the time it takes to decelerate and then accelerate again. Overall express service rarely saves more than 10 minutes.

]]> By: grownANDsexy http://secondavenuesagas.com/2007/08/30/getting-to-the-root-of-the-culver-viaduct-rehabilitation-plan/#comment-1274 grownANDsexy Sun, 02 Sep 2007 09:21:53 +0000 http://secondavenuesagas.com/2007/08/30/getting-to-the-root-of-the-culver-viaduct-rehabilitation-plan/#comment-1274 @ Marc Shepherd Yeah, I thought about it some more and I do think Church Ave can handle 2 train lines especially since the G doesn't run as often as the V does (except rush hour). But... I think Forest Hills–71st Avenue isn't a great example. The R and V trains practically are on top of each other entering Forest Hills–71st Avenue... and forget about it if the train crew can't get someone off the train. Forest Hills–71st Avenue actually has MORE capacity then Church Ave (twice as much). I think the best solution is that the G (because is smaller and more controllable) should terminate at 18Ave middle track and just turn around there. It creates a bottle neck at Ditmas Ave though... @ Carolyn Konheim I don't think the F express from Kings Highway to the city (and the reverse in the afternoon) will work. You end up skipping many of the neighborhoods that get on the train at those stops, Kings Highway makes a terrible terminal for V tains, and everyone will end up jamming Church Ave and 18 Ave stations to get on the express because those are the only 2 stops the locals can get that express train. Are those 5 stops skipped in Brooklyn really going to get you there faster if you have to wait 1-2 minutes at 18 ave and church ave each for trains to open and close doors because so many people want to get on? Then, just for the train to be packed as it enters 7 Ave so you can wait again as people try to get on? The F train should be express weekdays from Church to Jay Street in Brooklyn both ways, but I don't know about the benefit of making it express all the way to Kings Highway. I think all you will end up with is just getting yourself 2 minutes ahead of schedule AND create bottle necks due to the local V train needing to terminate at Kings Highway... or worst, at Coney Island along with the F train. @ Marc Shepherd
Yeah, I thought about it some more and I do think Church Ave can handle 2 train lines especially since the G doesn’t run as often as the V does (except rush hour).

But…
I think Forest Hills–71st Avenue isn’t a great example. The R and V trains practically are on top of each other entering Forest Hills–71st Avenue… and forget about it if the train crew can’t get someone off the train.

Forest Hills–71st Avenue actually has MORE capacity then Church Ave (twice as much).

I think the best solution is that the G (because is smaller and more controllable) should terminate at 18Ave middle track and just turn around there. It creates a bottle neck at Ditmas Ave though…

@ Carolyn Konheim
I don’t think the F express from Kings Highway to the city (and the reverse in the afternoon) will work. You end up skipping many of the neighborhoods that get on the train at those stops, Kings Highway makes a terrible terminal for V tains, and everyone will end up jamming Church Ave and 18 Ave stations to get on the express because those are the only 2 stops the locals can get that express train.

Are those 5 stops skipped in Brooklyn really going to get you there faster if you have to wait 1-2 minutes at 18 ave and church ave each for trains to open and close doors because so many people want to get on? Then, just for the train to be packed as it enters 7 Ave so you can wait again as people try to get on?

The F train should be express weekdays from Church to Jay Street in Brooklyn both ways, but I don’t know about the benefit of making it express all the way to Kings Highway. I think all you will end up with is just getting yourself 2 minutes ahead of schedule AND create bottle necks due to the local V train needing to terminate at Kings Highway… or worst, at Coney Island along with the F train.

]]> By: Marc Shepherd http://secondavenuesagas.com/2007/08/30/getting-to-the-root-of-the-culver-viaduct-rehabilitation-plan/#comment-1270 Marc Shepherd Sat, 01 Sep 2007 11:46:49 +0000 http://secondavenuesagas.com/2007/08/30/getting-to-the-root-of-the-culver-viaduct-rehabilitation-plan/#comment-1270 To the question above...I think there would be more than enough capacity to turn two services at Church Avenue, which was built as a proper terminal, much like Forest Hills–71st Avenue. The other possibility is that the express trains would continue to Kings Highway or Avenue X, so only the G would have to turn at Church Avenue. Yes, it would require more rolling stock, and the express tracks would have to be re-signaled. To the question above…I think there would be more than enough capacity to turn two services at Church Avenue, which was built as a proper terminal, much like Forest Hills–71st Avenue. The other possibility is that the express trains would continue to Kings Highway or Avenue X, so only the G would have to turn at Church Avenue.

Yes, it would require more rolling stock, and the express tracks would have to be re-signaled.

]]> By: Carolyn Konheim http://secondavenuesagas.com/2007/08/30/getting-to-the-root-of-the-culver-viaduct-rehabilitation-plan/#comment-1271 Carolyn Konheim Fri, 31 Aug 2007 17:38:52 +0000 http://secondavenuesagas.com/2007/08/30/getting-to-the-root-of-the-culver-viaduct-rehabilitation-plan/#comment-1271 When our websote gets back up, you will see a detailed operational and cost-benefit analysis of running the V into Brklyn and the F as a peak direction service from Church to Coney Island. It's in the comprehensive 2003 plan: "Better Transit for Brooklyn, a Draft Brooklyn Transit Agenda." It was developed with 15 of Bkn's community boards. has been th subject of a public hearing by the NYS Assembly and is unanimously endorsed by the Bkn delegation to the Assembly and by all transit advocacy groups. In 2002, the MTA's response to the 2001 draft Agenda was that they couldn't expand F service until the Bergen St control station as rebuilt (should be done by 2008) and that they could not run more peak hour trains because the B Div has not one spare car--and, in response to questioning at a NYMTC hearing on the 2006 TIP, the MTA con firmed it has NO intention of expanding its smallest ever fleet. In fact, it plans to scrap 907 existing cars as new ones are delivered over the coming year. That's why the #1 priority for any improvement in service must be to salvage the best 200-300 cars and rehab them at a third of the cost of new cars. The companion measure is that they need to find new storage capacity for the added fleet (such as returning to lay by tracks, now that graffiti is more under control) or they could run more off-peak service. When our websote gets back up, you will see a detailed operational and cost-benefit analysis of running the V into Brklyn and the F as a peak direction service from Church to Coney Island. It’s in the comprehensive 2003 plan: “Better Transit for Brooklyn, a Draft Brooklyn Transit Agenda.” It was developed with 15 of Bkn’s community boards. has been th subject of a public hearing by the NYS Assembly and is unanimously endorsed by the Bkn delegation to the Assembly and by all transit advocacy groups.

In 2002, the MTA’s response to the 2001 draft Agenda was that they couldn’t expand F service until the Bergen St control station as rebuilt (should be done by 2008) and that they could not run more peak hour trains because the B Div has not one spare car–and, in response to questioning at a NYMTC hearing on the 2006 TIP, the MTA con firmed it has NO intention of expanding its smallest ever fleet. In fact, it plans to scrap 907 existing cars as new ones are delivered over the coming year. That’s why the #1 priority for any improvement in service must be to salvage the best 200-300 cars and rehab them at a third of the cost of new cars. The companion measure is that they need to find new storage capacity for the added fleet (such as returning to lay by tracks, now that graffiti is more under control) or they could run more off-peak service.

]]> By: kensingtonbrooklyn http://secondavenuesagas.com/2007/08/30/getting-to-the-root-of-the-culver-viaduct-rehabilitation-plan/#comment-1273 kensingtonbrooklyn Fri, 31 Aug 2007 01:15:02 +0000 http://secondavenuesagas.com/2007/08/30/getting-to-the-root-of-the-culver-viaduct-rehabilitation-plan/#comment-1273 Its dissappointing the MTA is taking this off the table until 2012. With the congestion much of the other lines will feel from Atlantic Yards people will need an alternative and continue to move in large numbers along the F line. I'm w Gary and plan to keep the pressure on! K(B) Its dissappointing the MTA is taking this off the table until 2012. With the congestion much of the other lines will feel from Atlantic Yards people will need an alternative and continue to move in large numbers along the F line. I’m w Gary and plan to keep the pressure on!
K(B)

]]> By: Todd http://secondavenuesagas.com/2007/08/30/getting-to-the-root-of-the-culver-viaduct-rehabilitation-plan/#comment-1272 Todd Fri, 31 Aug 2007 00:54:56 +0000 http://secondavenuesagas.com/2007/08/30/getting-to-the-root-of-the-culver-viaduct-rehabilitation-plan/#comment-1272 I'd bitch about the work they're going to do on the viaduct, but considering the MTA's approach to "work", I'm pretty sure there will only be noise for about 15 minutes each day. I’d bitch about the work they’re going to do on the viaduct, but considering the MTA’s approach to “work”, I’m pretty sure there will only be noise for about 15 minutes each day.

]]> By: grownANDsexy http://secondavenuesagas.com/2007/08/30/getting-to-the-root-of-the-culver-viaduct-rehabilitation-plan/#comment-1279 grownANDsexy Fri, 31 Aug 2007 00:04:49 +0000 http://secondavenuesagas.com/2007/08/30/getting-to-the-root-of-the-culver-viaduct-rehabilitation-plan/#comment-1279 Does anyone know why the express tracks were shut down in the first place? I do know that currently the signals on the express track only allow one train at a time between 4th ave and Jay street (one really long absolute block). I do not know how hard it will be to correct that. It would be pretty amazing if they could bring back real express service on the F. While I am pretty sure that express service from King Highway to Bergen Street wouldn't work too well (unless somehow it is shown that the population along the line has grown), express from Church to Bergen would be very nice. I don't know how this will effect the G train if the V is allowed to enter Brooklyn. There are no switches that will allow the G train to terminate at Hoyt-Schemohorn unless they add one. The G can't terminate at Smith and 9th due to the tracks being in use by the F express. It can't terminate at Church Ave because the V train will be terminating there... then again there might be enough room for the G and the V to terminate at Church but it will be a tight squeeze. There will be delays getting into Church ave for the local lines. Then there is the question of having more trains. With extended service further out means that there will be a need for more trains in order to keep the schedule of a train every 10 minutes (more or less). There will need to be more V trains and maybe more G trains (at least during rush hour) to cover the extended time it takes for a train to return to the original terminal. Sorry for the long post... I have always been interested in transportation management, engineering and urban design. Does anyone know why the express tracks were shut down in the first place?

I do know that currently the signals on the express track only allow one train at a time between 4th ave and Jay street (one really long absolute block). I do not know how hard it will be to correct that.

It would be pretty amazing if they could bring back real express service on the F. While I am pretty sure that express service from King Highway to Bergen Street wouldn’t work too well (unless somehow it is shown that the population along the line has grown), express from Church to Bergen would be very nice.

I don’t know how this will effect the G train if the V is allowed to enter Brooklyn. There are no switches that will allow the G train to terminate at Hoyt-Schemohorn unless they add one. The G can’t terminate at Smith and 9th due to the tracks being in use by the F express. It can’t terminate at Church Ave because the V train will be terminating there… then again there might be enough room for the G and the V to terminate at Church but it will be a tight squeeze. There will be delays getting into Church ave for the local lines.

Then there is the question of having more trains. With extended service further out means that there will be a need for more trains in order to keep the schedule of a train every 10 minutes (more or less). There will need to be more V trains and maybe more G trains (at least during rush hour) to cover the extended time it takes for a train to return to the original terminal.

Sorry for the long post… I have always been interested in transportation management, engineering and urban design.

]]> By: Marc Shepherd http://secondavenuesagas.com/2007/08/30/getting-to-the-root-of-the-culver-viaduct-rehabilitation-plan/#comment-1283 Marc Shepherd Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:25:30 +0000 http://secondavenuesagas.com/2007/08/30/getting-to-the-root-of-the-culver-viaduct-rehabilitation-plan/#comment-1283 The A/C analogy doesn't work, because there are only two services merging. In this case, you would have three services (F, G, and V) trying to share one track. You can't do that without introducing switching delays. The A/C analogy doesn’t work, because there are only two services merging. In this case, you would have three services (F, G, and V) trying to share one track. You can’t do that without introducing switching delays.

]]>