G Train terminal.

[railfan365]

Now that Smith-9th Street is in use again, is there any word on the G Train to Church being reconsidered? Or is it still on a permanent basis?

[SlowFreight]

It appears to be permanent, by inertia if nothing else. Supposedly the funding has been continued. Now, if we could just get express service on all that new track with its new signal system....

[railfan365]

It appears to be permanent, by inertia if nothing else. Supposedly the funding has been continued. Now, if we could just get express service on all that new track with its new signal system....

You raise a good point Slow (or should I say Mr. Freight). Especially since express service was previously dropped because of a fire damaging a switch wich has presumably been restored.

[eastwind]

It appears to be permanent, by inertia if nothing else. Supposedly the funding has been continued. Now, if we could just get express service on all that new track with its new signal system....

You raise a good point Slow (or should I say Mr. Freight). Especially since express service was previously dropped because of a fire damaging a switch wich has presumably been restored.

Only problem with that is, with the Bergen St lower level express station abandoned (refer to map at http://www.columbia.edu/~brennan/abandoned/bergenst.html), the next stop for F express trains after Jay St would be 7th Ave, bypassing four local stops: Bergen, Carroll, Smith-9th, and 4th Ave. The only way to get to those stations from Manhattan F train stations would be (a) take the F express to 7th Ave, cross over and double back on the G local or (b) change at Jay St from F to A/C, go one stop to Hoyt-Schermerhorn, cross over and double back on the G. Neither would please F riders from Manhattan/Queens (or Boro Hall, for that matter), who have had direct service to their local stations all these years.

If there were crossovers at 7th Ave (are there?), I suppose you could run local to 7th Ave and then express to Church Ave, bypassing two local stations, but what would be the point of that?

I remember Bergen St lower level from the few years in the 70's when rush-hour F trains ran express all the way to Kingshighway, using the middle track on the el beyond Church Ave. As I recall, it was damp, dim, and distressing. And a bit of a hike up the stairs to connect with the local on the upper level. No loss it's gone.

The only solution I can see that would allow some express service here would be to run every other F train express, as they did in the 70's. Trains to Kingshighway could run local both in the subway and (peak direction) on the el, and trains to Coney Island would run express. Would that be enough? Or would it be too confusing?

[railfan365]

It appears to be permanent, by inertia if nothing else. Supposedly the funding has been continued. Now, if we could just get express service on all that new track with its new signal system....

You raise a good point Slow (or should I say Mr. Freight). Especially since express service was previously dropped because of a fire damaging a switch wich has presumably been restored.

Only problem with that is, with the Bergen St lower level express station abandoned (refer to map at http://www.columbia.edu/~brennan/abandoned/bergenst.html), the next stop for F express trains after Jay St would be 7th Ave, bypassing four local stops: Bergen, Carroll, Smith-9th, and 4th Ave. The only way to get to those stations from Manhattan F train stations would be (a) take the F express to 7th Ave, cross over and double back on the G local or (b) change at Jay St from F to A/C, go one stop to Hoyt-Schermerhorn, cross over and double back on the G. Neither would please F riders from Manhattan/Queens (or Boro Hall, for that matter), who have had direct service to their local stations all these years.

If there were crossovers at 7th Ave (are there?), I suppose you could run local to 7th Ave and then express to Church Ave, bypassing two local stations, but what would be the point of that?

I remember Bergen St lower level from the few years in the 70's when rush-hour F trains ran express all the way to Kingshighway, using the middle track on the el beyond Church Ave. As I recall, it was damp, dim, and distressing. And a bit of a hike up the stairs to connect with the local on the upper level. No loss it's gone.

The only solution I can see that would allow some express service here would be to run every other F train express, as they did in the 70's. Trains to Kingshighway could run local both in the subway and (peak direction) on the el, and trains to Coney Island would run express. Would that be enough? Or would it be too confusing?

Actually, your suggestion is quite good. The bigger question is whether the decision makers at NYC TA will see it our way.

[eastwind]

Actually, your suggestion is quite good. The bigger question is whether the decision makers at NYC TA will see it our way.

Thanks, but I didn't think it up. That's how F service ran for a little while, oh, forty years ago. That's when F service on the Culver was new, post-Chrystie Street. Prior to that, it was the D train, local all the way with R-9's (aka "cow trains"). Eesh.
The question in my mind is, Why did the express service not survive? Was it too little ridership, lack of equipment, or what? My comment on "too confusing' refers to my having observed, despite numerous announcements of "This is a Coney Island F train making express stops only", people getting upset and banging on the doors when the train didn't stop at Ditmas Avenue. Maybe if they'd designated express trains as FX or something, instead of relying on the subtler distinction of destination—Kingshighway for the local, Coney Island for the express, but only during rush hours; at all other times the Coney Island trains ran local—people would have known. But then, Flushing line riders don't seem to have a problem distinguishing locals from expresses even though they're all 7's. Maybe it's because the Flushing line has always had expresses, whereas on the Culver line it was something new and unfamiliar?
Anyway, since the express service didn't survive, what's changed ridership-wise to make it desirable again? I'm with you that an F express might even be faster to Coney Island than the Brighton express (that's the B train for you youngsters) with its required transfer to the Q at Sheepshead Bay. But are there that many people going the whole distance? On a hot summer weekend, sure, but that's precisely when the F express didn't run. Are you proposing that it do so now?

[railfan365]

Regarding eastwind's post, the reason why Culver Express service disappeared and didn't resume is that a switch damaged by fire and TA was either unwilling or unable to repair it.

As to what would be done with resumed express runs, my suggestion is to have it during rush hours with the split between local and express trains being based on demand,, and look into whether there would be demand for express service all the way to Coney during the summer.

Finally, as to distinguishing local and express trains, while I've never been on an F train that was running express on the Culver Line, I have travelled extensively on the Flushing Line. On the Flushing Line, 85% of the line is 3 tracks, the local trains are called by a 7 in a purple circle while the expresses are called by a 7 in a purple diamond, and the on train announcements plainly state the service. The circle/diamond designations, together with the electronical strip maps and side markers could be used along with announcements that refer to whether the train is going express or local.

[eastwind]

On the Flushing Line, 85% of the line is 3 tracks, the local trains are called by a 7 in a purple circle while the expresses are called by a 7 in a purple diamond, and the on train announcements plainly state the service. The circle/diamond designations, together with the electronical strip maps and side markers could be used along with announcements that refer to whether the train is going express or local.

Circles and diamonds are subtle distinctions unless you're accustomed to looking for them. Electronic strip maps and side markers—ahh, didn't have those 40 years ago. Some things do improve with age.

Are you saying that the damaged switch, which I presume was at Bergen Street, has been made operational again?

And since I wasn't there, tell me how trains skipped Smith-9th during the station rebuilding. Did they run through without stopping on the local track, or did they switch to the express track and if so, where?

[railfan365]

I don't know when the switch was repaired, but it was scheduled to be. Trains were run through Smith-9th on the express tracks when the locals weren't there.

[DaveBarraza]

Regarding eastwind's post, the reason why Culver Express service disappeared and didn't resume is that a switch damaged by fire and TA was either unwilling or unable to repair it.

You mean the fire in 1999 was the thing that ended Culver express service... in the 1970's? Prior to 1999 Bergen Street interlocking was fully functional. Was there some other fire?

It wasn't a switch that was damaged it was Bergen St Tower itself.

You say "unable" -meaning what exactly? MOW busted its arse to get the two critical switches back running under signal control in like 3 months. Read the plaque on the wall.

"unwilling" --?

[eastwind]

Dave, that's what I was wondering, too. If the F express had been as important to the TA then as South Ferry and Rockaway are now, the express service would have been suspended for maybe a few months, rather than cancelled flat. Why did it fail?

Which brings me back to my question: Why is it important to have F express service now? Has the line gotten crowded? Are there so many passengers traveling the length of the line now that skipping intermediate stops would inconvenience a relative few? Or is it just a matter of frustration with all those local stops when unused express tracks are plainly visible? I sympathize, believe me, but there has to be a compelling reason....

And I'd still like to know how trains bypassed Smith-9th during the recent rebuilding. See, I know what the old track layout looked like, but I'm trying to visualize the current one. If there are crossovers between Carroll and Smith-9th, as would seem to be implied, that opens up possibilities. I think I read somewhere that 7th Ave is getting crossovers just west of the station. That would be a change from 40 years ago and would open up other possibilities. Anybody help me out here? If this has been described in another thread, please point me to it. Thanks.

[railfan365]

Toward everyone having their facts straight, there was F express service in Brooklyn into the early 1990's. As to why that part of the service was dropped, only transport managers would know. But as with other discussions on this blog, we can still share our views on it.

[SlowFreight]

Which brings me back to my question: Why is it important to have F express service now? Has the line gotten crowded?

And I'd still like to know how trains bypassed Smith-9th during the recent rebuilding

I'll answer your second question first. During some of the rebuilding, there was a shoofly connecting the local track with the express track outside Carrol St (no switches involved), and no temporary platforms were built at Smith/9th the way they were at 4th/9th. Later, after platform work was completed, the shooflys were removed and track restored to the original alignments. At that time, trains sailed through without stopping until service was restored.

Now, as to your first question, the F is EXTREMELY crowded. Unlike the B and D, which run 8-car trains with traditional seating and almost always have room for a seat, the F runs 10-car trains with high-standee capacity bench seating, and from rush hour until about 11PM you will often be packed in and unable to move until Brooklyn. Bergen and Carrol are the heavy lifters, followed by 7th/9th and 4th/9th. So it's not necessarily about making the trip faster to CI as it is about freeing up seats for those people going past Park Slope.

F is far and away the most heavily used of the 6th avenue trains, with the longest trains, biggest crowds, and no express service at all.

[DaveBarraza]

B, D, and F all run 600' trains. F is not the "longest"

[eastwind]

I'll answer your second question first. During some of the rebuilding, there was a shoofly connecting the local track with the express track outside Carrol St (no switches involved), and no temporary platforms were built at Smith/9th the way they were at 4th/9th. Later, after platform work was completed, the shooflys were removed and track restored to the original alignments. At that time, trains sailed through without stopping until service was restored.

Thanks for the explanation.

Now, as to your first question, the F is EXTREMELY crowded. Unlike the B and D, which run 8-car trains with traditional seating and almost always have room for a seat, the F runs 10-car trains with high-standee capacity bench seating, and from rush hour until about 11PM you will often be packed in and unable to move until Brooklyn. Bergen and Carrol are the heavy lifters, followed by 7th/9th and 4th/9th. So it's not necessarily about making the trip faster to CI as it is about freeing up seats for those people going past Park Slope.

So running every other F as an express Jay St-7th Ave-Church Ave would do the trick? Or would that just lead to more crowding on the half-as-often F locals?