Subway terminal capacity

I try to read most of the posts every night. I find myself by turns ,amused, enlightened, and sometimes confused by some of these posts. Many posters have come up with new routes or asked for increased service on particular lines or sections of lines. Increased or service for example. Adding a service to the Canarsie line or IND Fulton Street line to Lefferts Blvd. Some of the proposals do have merit and should be discussed however very few posters look at the whole enchilada. Most lines end in a two track terminal, ie;Woodlawn or Lefferts Blvd. If you add more trains per hour the lines may see less crowded trains in midtown during the rush hours but many riders and employees see the consequences of that in the outer boroughs especially when approaching the terminals. Things grind to a halt about 3-5 stations before the end of the line. When you have trains on a four or five minute headway arriving at a location where the headway after the rush is eight or ten minutes you have gridlock. It's not as bad where there are relay tracks or a storage facility in close proximity, but that's not in every case. All I'm asking for is for posters to look at the whole line they propose or want to change, and not just a small segment. Before you posters bring up CBTC or ATS those systems weren't designed for, and cannot, as they are currently set up, eliminate the problem I'm talking about. I await your comments and suggestions. Feel free to agree or disagree but keep it civil and on topic.

Trainmaster, you bring up an excellent point. A lot of the delays that commuters deal with today are in fact caused by backed up terminals. Let's take a look at Pelham Bay Park on the . Delays start as far back as Middletown Road or Westchester Square. This, in turn, affects trains relaying back downtown. Fortunately, in the evening rush, the local trains turn back at Parkchester.

Trainmaster5, speak as the true trainmaster that you are. :tup::tup::tup:

Too many heads here want to see a particular route just to have it or to make their trip easier. they dont think of the impact to service to that line, other lines, other passengers or crews. I personally for example, would only bring back the as a new designation for Lefferts . same service and headways, and less confusing to riders who need either Rockaway/JFK or Lefferts. no extra cars or crews needed, and Lefferts would still handle its current traffic.

I like the fact that actually employees like you are here and bring a "reality check".

mucho props!

Ohh mannn! , i thought "we needed an (8)" :cool:

Yup yout right mr . Plus if this was a reality, i wonder where the would get the money for all this..

I know I already hit the "thanks" button but THANK you for posting this. It's something that obviously a lot of people ignore when putting together ideas.

That's why I laugh whenever I see fantasy maps that have 3 or more services using the same track, or two or more services using the same two pocket terminal

dont get me started on the fantasy maps! The only fantasy map i wanna look at is the one that would show how our system would be if the Second System was fully completed

I couldn't agree more. I'm glad that many people here have great ideas to improve service, but they have to look at where the MTA is going to get the money from because financially they're down the toilet and not many funds are coming their way right now. Also, they have to see how riders will benefit from the service change and not just railfans or themselves, because personally, if it were my choice, I'd reroute many trains and routes to how I'd like it, but I have to look at how passengers will benefit. If they don't benefit from the change, then what's the point of adding the service?

Thank you for bringing reason to the forums. We need more people who have more logical sense so their emotions won't go into overdrive.

I know I already hit the "thanks" button but THANK you for posting this. It's something that obviously a lot of people ignore when putting together ideas.

 

That's why I laugh whenever I see fantasy maps that have 3 or more services using the same track, or two or more services using the same two pocket terminal

Lord.. many people fail to realise the design of the subway system. Our system is unique to many in that we have a trunk-branch system. Several branches conjoin to form one trunk, then split off, merge with other branch lines to form new trunks. It's really difficult to add new services or even add new trains. Look at Paris and Tokyo, where many lines are individual lines, with maybe a branch or two.

A similar problem is occurring (on a smaller scale) in DC. The Blue Line shares the tunnel with the Orange Line from Rosslyn to Stadium-Armoury. It shares the line with the Yellow from Pentagon to King Street, Alexandria. There is a capacity issue as there is a bottleneck at Rosslyn. There are many plans to reroute the Blue Line, either via the Yellow Line or via a new subway through downtown DC.

The point is, people have to understand the complexity of the system. It's not as much as adding random services here and there, it's about keeping the overall system stable, having the less delays and disruptions due to congestion, about maintaining a certain level of capacity that does not affect riders on a significant scale etc...