agar io

Yes, but NYC Subway doesn't use it except for the peak-direction lines (like the ) and for single-track reroutes (like the shuttle to Hudson Yards and Times Square).

Even if there were bi-directional signaling, that will require switches between all four tracks at Queens Plaza, 36 St, and 71 Av at the very least. Using the nycsubway.org track map as a baseline, let's make up a scenario where bi-directional Say both northbound (Jamaica-bound) tracks are out of service between 71 Av and Queens Plaza, and all southbound (Manhattan-bound) service is operating on the northbound express track, with all northbound service running local. Then there would have to be a new switch built around 71 Av (link to nycsubway.org track map), since neither southbound track can access the northbound express track (but not vice versa, which is why I'm using this particular scenario). Even if we only connected the two express tracks, this would work because trains originating from Jamaica Yard would immediately go onto the southbound express track, then onto the northbound express. East of Queens Plaza, there are the requisite switches for northbound trains on either northbound track to access the southbound express track right before the 63rd Connector. Meanwhile, southbound trains from the northbound express could access both southbound tracks. The problem is the 63rd Connector, which can only access the express and local tracks in their respective direction (northbound 63rd could only go to northbound local/express, and vice versa). So, a switch between the express tracks would probably have to be built just east of where the connector merges into the QBL, probably within 36th St. tl;dr - If two switches (southbound exp. to northbound exp. @ 71 Av, and both exp. tracks @ 36 St) were built, then maybe we can talk about bidirectional signaling of the QBL express tracks.

Yeah, and I guess 121 St is also only being renovated one direction, so no fanfare about it.

If the MTA didn't have a habit of changing minor things so much (like the shade of sidewalk above Second Avenue), this wouldn't be happening.

The projects that could be done easily, were done quickly. The bigger projects were "delayed" until the end of time (or in the case of the Second Avenue Subway, probably to the end of the 21st century). I was thinking about the 1968 plan too, and it looks like the Pelham line north of Hunts Point would have just connected to the 2 Av line instead, but below ground, with two underground stations at Hunts Point (one being the new Pelham terminus). 1) Probably, though it would be more than inefficient given the different signaling systems, train widths, and tripcocks on each division. This setup is already done in Philadelphia (Market-Frankford and trolley), London, and even Tokyo. 2) Yes, that's what the uses to turn.

True. Also, we have less than 9,974 cars, yet the fleet numbers go up to 9974 because of the gaps in numbering between cars of different contracts. These gaps can be used to provide 4-digit numbers for over 2,000 cars without any duplication.

Here's a list of 1000-9999 fleet numbers that are used up: R44SIR: 388–466 (including even-only pairs from 436 on) R142: 1101–1250 R62: 1301–1625 R62A: 1651–2475 R68: 2500–2924 R179: 3010-3309 R32: 3350–3949 (many retired) (excluding that mismatched 3348 pair, which I think is scrapped too) R42: 4550–4949 (many retired) R68: 5001–5200 R46: 5482–6258 (including even-only pairs from 6208 on) R142 again: 6301–7180 R142A and R188: 7211–7936 R143: 8101–8312 R160 (all types): 8313–9974 I think the MTA will do one of the following: 1. Use fleet numbers 3950 to 4999, plus smaller range that covers 3310–3949 (the R32s), since R42s will all be retired by then 2. Use mostly three-digit numbers, plus smaller range in the four-digits 3. Use five-digit numbers, scrapping the 4-digit completely.

Thanks for the correction. There is indeed a clock at Grand Av, and I saw it today at the Broadway end of the platform. I must not have seen it. Doesn't seem like a terminal next-train indicator. They're like the red-LED next-train indicators that have a single line on them. Both show which platform has a train currently serving it. The indicator presumably gets passengers to hurry up to their trains, but it's useless now since everyone rushes to the platform every time they hear a motor sound.

I saw them this morning. It doesn't look like the system can handle the data from trains yet (seeing as how we only have data from the 6 Ave and Broadway Lines), but I could be wrong. There are also clocks at Steinway and 36 Sts on the QBL, which are not operational. The older LED signs are still there, as well as Queens Plaza, and probably won't be removed when the new clocks come on. For some reason, I didn't see any new clocks at Grand Av or Elmhurst Av.

Cool photoshopping. How are you going to arrange all of these tracks to make this configuration happen? Right now, your proposed 6th Avenue southbound track feeds into the current northbound track. I can kinda see how you can shift the 6 Ave tracks so the new northbound track flies over the 2nd Ave southbound track, but immediately to the north, there's the M train connector to W'burg Bridge blocking the way.

Yeah, but most are park buildings.

Agree. People can get hit by buses, cars, trucks, etc. as well while trying to get their phones. Doesn't mean we ban people from entering the street. If someone is stupid enough, they'll just find another way to get themselves hurt, no matter what gets banned. Including ignoring important safety notices that say "don't go onto the tracks".

People below 18 can't drive legally, though. How else they are going to school if they live far away? Should they take three buses? I already had to do that in addition to the subway at age 14. Anyway, I think the best suggestion is to be careful and not ignore the announcement that says "Do not go into the tracks." The only way anyone can be killed is if they do something really dumb, like ignoring the announcement.

Even better if the MTA had a cross platform transfer.

I know I'm replying a little late, but I went to DeKalb Ave and Cortlandt St last week. The displays were on, but I know for a fact that they weren't displaying any countdowns. I even snapped a pic of the "stop the spread" advertisement at Cortlandt, which is now also posted on wikipedia: But judging by the below post, I could have been wrong.

At Rector St, the uptown entrance is on one side of Trinity Pl and the uptown and downtown entrance is on the other side. They're literally right across the street from each other. I suppose that these entrances are definitely the closest between two unconnected stations in the entire system, a mere 30 ft. Quick question, though - why is there no downtown entrance to the at that location? Is it because of the proximity of the ?

And then terminate both the and on different levels at White Plains Rd and Gun Hill Rd. That way, there would be cross-Bronx connectivity and a bit fewer riders on the . A potential problem would be that the never connects to the in the Bronx, and the never connects to the at all. But riders have two chances to take the - at Gun Hill Rd and at 3 Av/149 St.

In 34 St-Herald Square, a new clock was installed on the uptown platform. It just so happened that the existing display was three feet away, and the existing display covered one face of the new display. On the downtown platform of Lex Av-63 St, the MTA literally installed not one, but two clocks two feet away from the pillars. And yes, the clocks faced the pillars. A big PITA when I need to go to Queens on the , but then find out that the is running local, the is not running to Manhattan, and there are miscellaneous construction slowdowns on the QBL.

You know it's bad when a crazy idea starts sounding too crazy. After all, the writer can't just draw lines on a subway map and say that the can be rerouted, same as how I can't just scribble on a world map and say that there are subways across the Atlantic Ocean.

I heard there was a stalled train at Hunters Point this morning. Anyone know what that's about?

Maybe the MTA is running the trains light to the elevated terminus.

Right now people take West End Line → → or Brighton to the directly. Or: The does operate all times to Broad St now, so this works. I'd like to see an MTA study on this though.

Me too. The problem is that it's just very long, like at Court Sq and at Times Sq-PABT. ---- Anyway, why is service from Jay St/Hoyt St,, respectively, to Church Av shut down during the storm? There are two elevated stations along the eight-stop stretch, and the seems to be moving along just fine with the shut down at 125 St.

Park Place and City Hall: This one might work. Prince Street and Broadway–Lafayette Street: The N-Q-R-W parallels the from Canal St to 14 St, so people can just transfer to the 6 at either station. Bowery and Grand Street: It would be convenient, but then, transfer to the can be made from the north via the at Delancey/Essex, and from the south via the at Canal. So, the MTA figures that this isn't needed. 57 Street–7 Avenue and 7 Avenue: This one would also work. Lexington Avenue/63 Street and 59 Street: It's expensive to bore vertically, thus why it was not even built when there were three chances to do so (original construction, opening of 63rd Connector, and SAS opening). Court Square–23 Street and Court Square : This one is convenient, but unlike in Hong Kong, the MTA doesn't believe in "multiple ways to get around a station complex." I'd like this one. Queensboro Plaza and Queens Plaza: This is also a vertical-distance problem. It would be good in theory for intra-Queens travel and also for connection between the and . But Lex-59 and Court Sq allow transfer between the N-W and R, and the E-M and 7 respectively, so you can backtrack, so the MTA thinks. (And I know you just talked about Court Sq. That one is very convenient too.) Fulton Street and Atlantic Avenue–Barclays Center: This was studied but the MTA rejected it. Junius Street and Livonia Avenue: Not only does this work, but also the MTA is actually planning for this. I see. This would still trigger an expensive reconstruction of many millions of dollars though (due to ADA requirements, since you can't just drill a hole and call it a passageway anymore), so my point about cost still stands.

Blame it on the platforms. If they weren't on two levels, this confusion wouldn't happen because the uptown platform wouldn't split the mezzanine. But since this is also a relic of the 3-company system (as is Canal St on the ), there's not much we can do about it. (On a side note, Canal St is really annoying to navigate compared to Fulton St, which has a mezzanine at least) As an Asian myself, I wonder if it's really worth it to reroute a whole line, for possibly millions of dollars every year, just so a little part of a demographic group can benefit. Sure, it helps if a large group like Sunset Park's Chinese community requests a change, but if it's just some people and not a majority of the neighborhood who is clamoring for the change, then the reroute would not be worth it.