Comments on: NYC Transit to cut $61M in jobs http://secondavenuesagas.com/2008/07/18/nyc-transit-to-cut-61m-in-jobs/ A New York City Subway Blog Wed, 03 Dec 2008 21:30:05 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Kai B http://secondavenuesagas.com/2008/07/18/nyc-transit-to-cut-61m-in-jobs/#comment-39830 Kai B Fri, 18 Jul 2008 13:43:59 +0000 http://secondavenuesagas.com/?p=1012#comment-39830 The G may have lower ridership than other lines, but it still manages to pack up four 75-foot cars every morning at six minute intervals. Not quite bus material. The G may have lower ridership than other lines, but it still manages to pack up four 75-foot cars every morning at six minute intervals. Not quite bus material.

]]> By: JP http://secondavenuesagas.com/2008/07/18/nyc-transit-to-cut-61m-in-jobs/#comment-39818 JP Fri, 18 Jul 2008 13:01:21 +0000 http://secondavenuesagas.com/?p=1012#comment-39818 Also re the Lex lines, until they resignal them where you can run the trains physically closer together, the solution they have there is the least worse answer. Also re the Lex lines, until they resignal them where you can run the trains physically closer together, the solution they have there is the least worse answer.

]]> By: JP http://secondavenuesagas.com/2008/07/18/nyc-transit-to-cut-61m-in-jobs/#comment-39817 JP Fri, 18 Jul 2008 13:00:02 +0000 http://secondavenuesagas.com/?p=1012#comment-39817 Shutting down lines, particularly the G, is a non-starter politically. It would get ugly. The G serves a lot of newly gentrified areas(read rich) and a lot of traditionally poor and minority areas(Bed-Stuy), shutting it down would unite them. Shutting down lines, particularly the G, is a non-starter politically. It would get ugly. The G serves a lot of newly gentrified areas(read rich) and a lot of traditionally poor and minority areas(Bed-Stuy), shutting it down would unite them.

]]> By: Ed http://secondavenuesagas.com/2008/07/18/nyc-transit-to-cut-61m-in-jobs/#comment-39812 Ed Fri, 18 Jul 2008 10:56:25 +0000 http://secondavenuesagas.com/?p=1012#comment-39812 If the MTA tries to run trains with the same frequency, but cuts maintenance, this will cause a "decline in service" as the AMNY writer notes, because riders will experience more delays. The upshot is still that it will take longer to get to work most mornings, same as if frequency has been cut. I wonder if the MTA is overvaluing the frequency of trains. During rush hour, I've noted the 4 and 5 comes frequently, but there are so many trains running that they travel really slowly. I realize that with less frequent trains the overcrowding on the line would get really bad, or at least even more noticeable, but maybe the MTA's current way of handling the issue is putting lipstick on a pig. Also, would it be feasible to just shut a subway line down completely? For example, the G which in its current form is pretty useless anyway? Would that generate savings that could be used to keep the rest of the system operational, or would it wind up actually costing more, as the idea of not providing 24 hour service would really wind up costing more? If the MTA tries to run trains with the same frequency, but cuts maintenance, this will cause a “decline in service” as the AMNY writer notes, because riders will experience more delays. The upshot is still that it will take longer to get to work most mornings, same as if frequency has been cut.

I wonder if the MTA is overvaluing the frequency of trains. During rush hour, I’ve noted the 4 and 5 comes frequently, but there are so many trains running that they travel really slowly. I realize that with less frequent trains the overcrowding on the line would get really bad, or at least even more noticeable, but maybe the MTA’s current way of handling the issue is putting lipstick on a pig.

Also, would it be feasible to just shut a subway line down completely? For example, the G which in its current form is pretty useless anyway? Would that generate savings that could be used to keep the rest of the system operational, or would it wind up actually costing more, as the idea of not providing 24 hour service would really wind up costing more?

]]>