Why do routes get rerouted or discontinued?

[motor]

The D train used to stop at Yankee Stadium x 2 (and still does), the site of the Polo Grounds (155th), and came within 2 blocks of the site of Ebbets Field (at Prospect Pk.).

But that was before the D was rerouted south of Atlantic Av./Barclays from the Brighton Line to the West End Line. Now the B is the only one seat ride linking the ghosts of Willie, Mickey, and the Duke (and only during rush hour).

Also, the V and the 9 were discontinued in recent years. In the '70s, so was the K. Was it politics? Ridership? The general economy?

???

motor

[Backshophoss]

Most likely money and ridership were the reasons.

[motor]

Could riding patterns be a factor as well? After all, the D still goes to Coney, but by a different route.

motor

[RWERN]

All of the factors play into changes to routes.

I'll admit that the K was slightly before my time but its elimination and replacement by expanded C service is simple enough to grasp. The C already ran over the most of the K's route during rush hours instead of the K, and so it was easy enough to justify it doing so the rest of the time, as the only stop lost was the K at World Trade Center, but the C at Chambers Street is basically equivalent.

The 9 train I do remember, though I never rode in the skip-stop territory which was far uptown. There was a progressive cutback in skip-stop service due to ridership decreases. Since the recent 9 began in 1989, the skip-stop was rush-hour only after 1994 and gone by 2005. Since the 1 and 9 ran the same route and the skip-stop area was limited, the value it added was small and got smaller over time, so it was easy to do away with the 9.

The W was discontinued when the V was discontinued. The W was born because of disruptions to service patterns because of the north tracks of the Manhattan Bridge being under reconstruction. It ran Astoria to Coney Island until the bridge was back up, when it was cut back to Astoria to Whitehall. Ending it was mostly financial, as its route were overlapped by the N and Q, the latter of which ended up getting extended to Astoria to get more complete coverage of the former W's route.

The V was introduced to add riding options and reduce crowding on trains on the Queens Blvd Line, particularly the E and F. Although the V was intended for load balancing, the load never quite got balanced. I remember seeing the V at Lexington Ave-53rd St, which is a very crowded station, where the E, V, and 6 stopped. The E and 6 were always extremely crowded while the V was often nearly empty. When the budget got tight, they needed to get rid of service but wanted to keep the strategic value of the V, so they derived the combination of the M and V services we have presently. Ridership patterns on the M were such that more riders wanted to go uptown than downtown, and combining with the V permitted that. The decision to take the M branding over the V was somewhat political as the logic was the seniority of the M service and supposed rider preference for it being the M not the V.

[railfan365]

All of the factors play into changes to routes.

I'll admit that the K was slightly before my time but its elimination and replacement by expanded C service is simple enough to grasp. The C already ran over the most of the K's route during rush hours instead of the K, and so it was easy enough to justify it doing so the rest of the time, as the only stop lost was the K at World Trade Center, but the C at Chambers Street is basically equivalent.

The 9 train I do remember, though I never rode in the skip-stop territory which was far uptown. There was a progressive cutback in skip-stop service due to ridership decreases. Since the recent 9 began in 1989, the skip-stop was rush-hour only after 1994 and gone by 2005. Since the 1 and 9 ran the same route and the skip-stop area was limited, the value it added was small and got smaller over time, so it was easy to do away with the 9.

The W was discontinued when the V was discontinued. The W was born because of disruptions to service patterns because of the north tracks of the Manhattan Bridge being under reconstruction. It ran Astoria to Coney Island until the bridge was back up, when it was cut back to Astoria to Whitehall. Ending it was mostly financial, as its route were overlapped by the N and Q, the latter of which ended up getting extended to Astoria to get more complete coverage of the former W's route.

The V was introduced to add riding options and reduce crowding on trains on the Queens Blvd Line, particularly the E and F. Although the V was intended for load balancing, the load never quite got balanced. I remember seeing the V at Lexington Ave-53rd St, which is a very crowded station, where the E, V, and 6 stopped. The E and 6 were always extremely crowded while the V was often nearly empty. When the budget got tight, they needed to get rid of service but wanted to keep the strategic value of the V, so they derived the combination of the M and V services we have presently. Ridership patterns on the M were such that more riders wanted to go uptown than downtown, and combining with the V permitted that. The decision to take the M branding over the V was somewhat political as the logic was the seniority of the M service and supposed rider preference for it being the M not the V.

For the most part, a good answer. I'm chiming in only to confirm based on news reports of the time that the M call letter was preserved over V because the yuppies in Greenpoint and Williamsburg were upset about losing the M, so to quiet things, they changed the name of the combined V/M service from V to M and kept the service change the same otherwise. Much like Ralph Kramden telling Norton that a $20 loan was buying him a 20% interest in the nonexistent Kramden corporation, and upping it to 35% to mollify Norton when no money was being made.

[4400Washboard]

Long story short:

V: When I first saw the subway map with the E G F V R lines all on the same 4-track line, I thought that the MTA had some printing error or the gods who build the NYC subway map made some erroneous error. The line was to crowded! Also, the V pretty much paralleled the F line, except that it used the E tunnels instead of the Roosevelt Island routing the F used and made local stops in Queens. The V was pretty much pointless when you could transfer to an E train at 7 Avenue, Lexington or 5th Avenues. Then from there, you could transfer to an R or future M local at Queens Plaza from an E train to get the V's former local stops. The MTA didn't have the money to operate a line that could just as easily be paralleled by commuters through a variety of transfers.

9: Why run skip-stop service and waste money while instead you could run a train that makes all stops. Saves passengers waiting time for their correct train (Reduces platform overcrowding) and simplifies operations.

K: The K line is just a linker between the E and C lines. The C train stops at Chambers Street, which is pretty darn close to WTC. Why run an extra train the whole length to 168 Street when the only difference between the C and K was a single stop (In relevant territory)? Running an extra train like that is not financially viable. It's like making a 6 train that starts from City Hall and runs to Parkchester along with the current 6 train. We could call it the 8 train!

W: The W was the result of a bridge closure and wasn't meant to be around for long. As sad as it was to see it go (For me at least), the W paralleled the N except for the City Hall to Whitehall Street segment. Transfer to an R at 14 Street if you want to go there. The MTA has to save money if it is to survive until 2050 (Let's hope )

<M>: Why? Why must the MTA operate service to Bay Pkwy. from Brooklyn? Transfer to a D train with the orange (M) at Bway/Lafayette Street

B/D Switch: Ridership patterns/preferences?

<5>: The rollsign tells it all; You don't need a special bullet

That's all the lines I'm going to go through for now

[Kamen Rider]

You really need to brush up on your subway history, because most of that isn't right.

: When I first saw the subway map with the E G F V R lines all on the same 4-track line, I thought that the MTA had some printing error or the gods who build the NYC subway map made some erroneous error.

Except for a short period in the evenings, all 5 lines did not operate at once. during the week during the day, it was the E,F,R and V and the G was cut short at Court Sq. at night it was the E, F and G. On Saturday and Sunday it was E,F,G and R.

, the V pretty much paralleled the F line, except that it used the E tunnels instead of the Roosevelt Island routing the F used and made local stops in Queens. The V was pretty much pointless when you could transfer to an E train at 7 Avenue, Lexington or 5th Avenues. Then from there, you could transfer to an R or future M local at Queens Plaza from an E train to get the V's former local stops. The MTA didn't have the money to operate a line that could just as easily be paralleled by commuters through a variety of transfers.

The V did not parallel the F as much as you think it did. They only shared two stops in Queens and eight in Manhattan. By this faulty logic they might as well get rid of the C.

The V was created because the move of the F to 63rd left the QB corridor with NO 6th ave service west of Roosevelt. And you think transferring three or 4 times is a solution?

9: Why run skip-stop service and waste money while instead you could run a train that makes all stops. Saves passengers waiting time for their correct train (Reduces platform overcrowding) and simplifies operations.

Skip stop works (which is why so many other transit agencies use it and why the MTA still does with the J and Z) when the flow is correct, picking up people on the outer end of the line and then dropping them off in the core. the only reason the 9 was cut was because of people at 1 stops wanting 9 stops and vice versa. it was not a waste of money in the least.

The W was the result of a bridge closure and wasn't meant to be around for long. As sad as it was to see it go (For me at least), the W paralleled the N except for the City Hall to Whitehall Street segment. Transfer to an R at 14 Street if you want to go there. The MTA has to save money if it is to survive until 2050 (Let's hope )

whit is with you and this insistence that lines can't operate in parallel for any length?

While it's true the W was created with the bridge closure, it was meant to stay. Broadway had long had a short line from Queens, in the past you had the EE local from Queens Blvd. With the Bridge fully open for the first time in 20 years, the MTA could run full service on both lines again. And they chose to offer commuters from Queens extra capacity on the Broadway local. See, this is the part you're missing with this and V. Capicty, it's all about moving people as quickly and effeinctly as possible. Besides, the W is returning when the Q is routed up Second Avenue to provide extra Astoria service.

The K line is just a linker between the E and C lines. The C train stops at Chambers Street, which is pretty darn close to WTC. Why run an extra train the whole length to 168 Street when the only difference between the C and K was a single stop (In relevant territory)? Running an extra train like that is not financially viable.

When the AA/K existed, it didn't run when the C was running. The C was rush hours only and ran from Bedford Park Blvd on the Concourse Line. The C merged with the K in 1998, and until around the 1999 Williamsburg Bridge shutdown, operated the K's Manhattan only route outside normal commuting hours. In order to provide the needed extra service to Brooklyn riders with the J and z cut back and the M in half, the C was extended to Euclid full time and the A made all day express. This meant for a time the C had three north terminals; BPB during the rush, 145th during the day and 168th any other time except when it wasn't running at night. When the B and C switched north ends in 1998, the C's route was locked to 168th to Euclid any time it ran.

It's like making a 6 train that starts from City Hall and runs to Parkchester along with the current 6 train. We could call it the 8 train

We have that... it's Circle 6 vs Diamond 6

<M>: Why? Why must the MTA operate service to Bay Pkwy. from Brooklyn? Transfer to a D train with the orange (M) at Bway/Lafayette Street

um, because there otherwise is only one line connecting South Brooklyn to Lower Manhattan (and even that's not working at the moment) and it had nothing to do with linking the two ends of the brown M, it's just the M was the best candidate since it was rather short otherwise. the B,D,F,N,Q all skip the financial district. The R is now the only line that, on paper for the moment, connects the old BMT Southern Division with anything in Manhattan south of Canal Street. the Bay Parkway M had 10,000 daily riders. stew on that for a second.

B/D Switch: Ridership patterns/preferences?

B was always a part time route. D was not. switching gave 4 lines of full time service to South Brooklyn, and ment the B could go to bed at night and not need to run shuttle service anymore.

<5>: The rollsign tells it all; You don't need a special bullet

Not always. Which is offcourse assuming the person in question can read...

[R36 Combine Coach]

To add above the K was the Manhattan local (off-peak) version of the weekday peak only C which ran to Rockaway Park. In December 1988 the K was dropped and the C began running to WTC evenings and weekends. In May 1999 the C began service to Euclid Avenue during off-peak times as well. The H "Rockaway Shuttle" ran connecting Rockaway points (until 1992, when the S designation was used).

Regarding the "diamond" version of routes, only two lines (6, 7) still use them as they are peak-direction expresses running alongside the regular locals. "11" was a possible designation for the 7 Express , this feature appears on the R62As.