Jump to content

Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.

RR503

Senior Member
  • Content Count

    1,785
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    42

RR503 last won the day on December 1

RR503 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,216 Excellent

5 Followers

About RR503

  • Rank
    Oink

Profile Information

  • Location
    Drainage ditch

Recent Profile Visitors

2,465 profile views
  1. RR503

    Planned Subway Service Changes

    RIP . No more access is gonna HURT.
  2. RR503

    CBTC - General Discussion

    A quick methodological note from my earlier sheet: the square footage data was not lifted from NYMTC; their stats are unreliable. I instead subtracted 3' from all car lengths to account for couplers, anti-climbers, end doors, etc, and set the widths to 8.5' for IRT and 9.9' for B div. I am well aware this fails to account for cabs, seats, etc, but without knowledge of car assignments, those stats are impossible to know. Here's the sheet on which I did those calcs; do point out any errors you see. Isn't he the guy who did this? https://www.newcivilengineer.com/moving-block-signals-finally-go-ahead-on-jubilee-line/796921.article
  3. RR503

    CBTC - General Discussion

    Absolutely. Sooner rather than later, there will need to be some sort of deinterlining. That said, we equally can’t lose sight of deficits in current service patterns. On 8th, the only line that can’t run more s/b trains today is the ; you could add 8 trains on the and 5 on the tomorrow with competent merge ops at Canal and no service reorganization. This issue holds on 6th and to a lesser extent on Broadway. So yes, we absolutely need to work on service patterns, but we equally need to work on service.
  4. RR503

    CBTC - General Discussion

    I disagree, actually. To use your example of Queens Boulevard, that line's express tracks once carried 34 trains per hour with '30s era signalling -- more than we are projected to get with CBTC. They did this without keying by or anything of that sort; they simply enforced tight schedule adherence, managed dwells, used STs, and didn't have to contend with anywhere near the timer/extended control line burden that we have today. And they didn't have centralized dispatching back then. As for 8th and 6th, you've again presented perfect examples of corridors whose capacity is restricted by poor operational decisions. 6th local runs pretty fine, but 6th express has the hellhole that is Dekalb sitting at its south end, and thus is restricted to 20-22 tph peak. Fix that junction (and tweak practices at 59/145) and you'd most certainly have 30tph. Over on 8th, service patterns are the killer. WTC is perfectly capable of turning 24tph, but the 's Brooklyn pattern and the 53 situation means that even if all trains were maxed out, we'd only get 45tph on the line (today, we run 10 , 7 and 15 southbound into the core during the AM rush, for a total of 32tph, meaning even w/o rearrangement there's room for improvement). Generally, the idea that CBTC increases capacity is flawed. Fixed blocks enforce train spacing relative to the best possible speed profile for any given area of track. CBTC allows you flexibility, sure, but that does not in any way change the fact that when you're descending below that optimum profile, you're losing capacity. So what CBTC really does is take the human element out of calculations -- an insignificant change at the throughputs we run/will need to run. This isn't to say I don't think we should have it (again, useful for when service gets crappy), but it needs to be treated as such -- a 'nice to have' instead of a 'we'll die if we don't have.' We risk sinking untold billions into what amounts to a golden parachute for those incompetent managers who created this crisis.
  5. RR503

    CBTC - General Discussion

    They have to upgrade in some areas, yes. But one fact that many commentators miss is that the fixed block systems currently in place are (generally speaking) not all that old. Much of the IRT was signaled parallel to ATS, IND Culver got during the rehab, CPW/Concourse/Inwood over a period of many years from the '80s onwards, West End, Sea Beach, Brighton all within the past two decades, etc etc etc. What we should be pursuing is thus a phased approach to implementation over the course of, say 20-30 years that focuses on incremental improvements to the fixed block system and competent installation of CBTC -- not an all out foamfest to obfuscate the causes of a completely separate issue, namely, that of system operational meltdown. CBTC is necessary if you have a system at saturation and/or if you have an ancient fixed block system. Neither is true in NYC. Back to the analysis, I've begun my analysis of ridership patterns and crowding levels. What little I have so far is, once again, damning of MTA practices. The peak-hour subway used to be significantly more crowded (in absolute and sq feet/person terms) than it is today. This is not to say we should defer service expansion until we reach those levels again, but I believe it does present yet another data point that runs counter to this publicly held narrative of overcapacity. Beyond the capacity implications of this data, this should raise some questions about operations. None of the '73 throughputs would wow anyone (a result of low car availability, I've been told), but we still managed to run high volume service in what were at times extreme crowding conditions (check out 53rd). Dwell management is a must, and seemingly, a lost art in this city.
  6. The issue is more complex than fare beating deficits or internal cost structure. Those areas (well, the latter area) certainly merit extensive attention, but underpinning all this is the fact that it is basically incapable of appraising its own flaws, and is thus incapable of allocating funds in a sensical manner. A perfect example of this is the Subway Action Plan. Anyone with a pair of eyes could tell you that a supermajority of all weekday subway delays are caused by either flagging or the operating environment; a person intelligent enough to go back a few years in the board books could tell you that it is moreover in those categories that delay growth has been happening. So why, pray, did we choose to spend $836 million on SAP? To be sure, there are certainly initiatives in the program that are necessary (restoring cut signal maintenance forces being a big one) but this obsession with maintenance delays speaks to the agency's fascination with misdirection. If you don't believe me when I say SAP was basically worthless, go here, find OTP, and filter out the which all got padded to hell. OTP is down. Here's the real kicker, though: SAP is largely at fault for the current budget crisis. No one ever really funded those initiatives on the governmental level, so they were just absorbed into to MTA baseline, vastly increasing the deficit. So instead of a relatively well balanced book, we're today seeing service and maintenance cuts to fund an $836 million plan to absolve the MTA's operations policies of fault for this sh*tshow. Sadly, we seem to be headed down a similar path. CBTC isn't a necessity, yet every regional pol and 'leader' with a pulse is falling over themselves to endorse it without so much as a second thought. I'll bet all the money in my wallet right now that the program won't be fully funded (or will use PAYGO, or extensive debt) and will thus require some level of ops budget 'rationalization' -- or service/maintenance cuts. So not only will we not be really winning any victory, but even the perceived one will be pyrrhic at best.
  7. RR503

    SUBWAY - Random Thoughts Topic

    Increase. As I'm sure you know, older parts of the signal system do not have those lighted numbers below their STs, just the signs saying ST 20 and so on. Ops thus must guess whether or not ST is active, meaning they run cautiously, or simply wait for a yellow. The lighted T clears up this ambiguity without the expense of a full mod.
  8. RR503

    SUBWAY - Random Thoughts Topic

    These Ts encourage ops to enter stations on ST--they're for areas that don't have the numbers below to inform ops. They seem to be lighted at all times save for those where the cutback ST line is occupied. Expect more of these in the near future. Currently, the other installation is n/b entering Jay on the .
  9. RR503

    Rockaway Beach Branch

    bEcaUse wE cAre sO mUCh aBouT scHeDuLEs
  10. RR503

    Service Cuts

    Yes. And the . Oh, totally with you here. This speaks to a complete institutional unwillingness to make anything more than the most superficial of efforts to rationalize internal cost structures, instead placing the burden of deficit on the rising public — whether that be through service cuts, maintenance cuts, cleaning cuts, or the like. This isn't just a shoddy thing to do. It’s patently terrible government policy — and it’s one that only can exist because of the MTAs complete lack of internal and external accountability. On the issue of weekend service, though, I’m gonna do an analysis of this. Not only have we swung too far towards this “let’s fix the system at any cost, however Pyrrhic victory may be,” but we also have practically zero productivity. Beyond doing a manual run through web archive, does anyone here know of a way to find old weekend changes (and crucially, the reasons given for them)? I was under the impression this was (at least on the subway side) more of an effort to cull service under the guise of facilitating GOs. On the bus side, I’m less sure, but I’ve heard this'll be cuts that bring under-guideline routes to guideline. This is all hearsay, though.
  11. RR503

    Service Cuts

    Whelp! It's that time of the decade again. If you wanna view it in PDF, see here: http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/docs/special-finance-committee/NYCT-BRPs.pdf#page=4 If I'm hearing right, it seems to be more of what they did on QB a year ago: make supplements into the base schedule. I'd guess that and maybe (?) riders are looking at cuts. The more scary part is that second sentence. I'd imagine the implication is that we're heading back toward mid-2000s off peak service, but what exactly that translates into (earlier full-line end times? More off-peak cutbacks?) remains to be seen.
  12. For those of us who haven't yet seen: http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/docs/special-finance-committee/Fare-evasion-board-doc_181130.pdf Takeway is about 500k daily fare evaders. I'm personally very suspicious of that number, but it's the best we've got. Generally, I think that too much of the debate here has centered around decriminalization. It has been shown (death penalty being an excellent example) that, to an extent, the severity of punishment doesn't necessarily change the frequency of the crime. What does is enforcement -- which is where we run into (completely valid) question of social justice; why does everyone stress poor people jumping turnstiles when the rich beat tolls and fares on the LIRR every day? The solution to this is the solution to the MTA's general ills: better, more competent, and more knowledgeable management.
  13. RR503

    Enhanced Station Initiative

    Yeah no structural work whatsoever was done. I don’t even think the ceiling was painted... This one was the definition of putting lipstick on a pig (dog?).
  14. RR503

    CBTC - General Discussion

    Little update in this regard: Edit: made it a lil easier to read...
  15. RR503

    R32 Fleet Swap Discussion Thread

    Was it between Atlantic and Canarsie?

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.