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

    2,413
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    77

RR503 last won the day on May 27

RR503 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,213 Excellent

7 Followers

About RR503

  • Rank
    Oink

Profile Information

  • Location
    Drainage ditch

Recent Profile Visitors

2,965 profile views
  1. Ah, did not realize that the power block included D5. I had thought the break lay beyond...guess not! Those operational issues are all issues, but — and not that any of this matters given the power issue — we are, in the end of the day, running a railroad for riders. Given the positive impact that a shortlined would have had on service, figuring out things like NIS moves isn’t all that big of an ask. And FWIW, s would fumigate out of the way of all other traffic at Queens Plaza — not to say that they should necessarily be fumigating, but that’s a whole other discussion.
  2. D5 is out of service because work limits are written to the outage limits, not because there's actually any work going on on/around it. There would likely be a weekend or two where D5 access would actually be needed, but otherwise telling the good folks in Track Access to move the GO limits to the other side of switches 465 and 471 should do the trick.
  3. That was an error on my part. I should have clarified: I meant Roosevelt Island, not Roosevelt Avenue — there are plenty of GTs between 21 and Roosevelt in both directions. Dunno why the ones under the river exist. That area was (partially) resignaled around 2000, so I’d imagine this was probably by design.
  4. We may just have to agree to disagree here. The impossibility of assessing a route's 'horrificness' aside, the Dyre line in the end of the day only attracts a fraction of Jerome's ridership. WPR draws more, but the line also gets more baseline service than Jerome (thank you, ). However much I may bemoan the MTA's weekend routing decisions in Brooklyn, there is some logic to them: every time they need to put all service on one track and flag, the would likely be cut to Bowling Green if not further north. The same would likely be true in the case of a Nostrand shutdown, what with the and already using Utica. I understand the impulse to choose the plan that provides more service in aggregate, but again, there needs to be a consideration of priorities here: is it worth messing with Jerome, forcing ugly transfers at 149, to run a more expensive service plan? I say no.
  5. I mean yeah, you could run 5tph of Bronx shuttles, but is that honestly a good use of resources given alternative plans exist? Remember, weekend crewing arrangements are extremely complicated given the number of CRs sucked into flagging — you have to pick what you’re gonna spend crew hours on wisely. Anticipating the argument about the shuttle being shorter than the and the crew issue thus not being as clear cut, the frequency difference (5tph vs 3tph) would require the shuttle to be 60% or less the length of the . This is not the case. Last I remember, running time from 149 to Woodlawn is around 20 mins, and 138 to Dyre is 28 or 29. That’s at best 69%. Once again, I want to go back to the larger problem of value here. What does this service pattern gain riders? Jerome loses 2.5tph of its only Manhattan service so that WPR can gain 2 on its second. Is it worth making yet another corridor suffer when you can add an overlay and call it a day?
  6. Good luck scheduling a 2.5tph overlay onto a 5tph service without creating all sorts of strange gaps in Manhattan. 3/3 is quick and easy that way. This would also get complicated whenever all service is on one track in Brooklyn. Relaying s on the upper level, fwiw, is not at all complicated. All the switches are there, and scheduling a 6/7.5tph merge is doable even for the most incompetent schedulers at NYCT. Then you have legible service patterns (every other to 149, all s through), you don’t have people walking down to the deep platforms at 149 just to crawl back up, and you get slightly improved frequency for intraboro/ transfer riders on WPR. I say a win.
  7. Yes, this was the pattern that was ran all through Clark. The point is again not that it’s impossible to run at 5, just that the agency prefers not to given the runtime impact of local and the relatively high weekend ridership on Pelham.
  8. This is very much a NYCT problem. Weekend service reduction is a direct result of the agency’s lack of attention to GO productivity and of flagging rules developed largely by the agency. The agency may not have control over some of the more arcane work rules, but it absolutely can do a better job coordinating projects, properly scheduling work trains and flagging crews, etc. It also could either invest in track barriers to eliminate adjacent flagging, or review flagging rules to understand what in them is working and what is not while comparing to other systems’ practices. And of course there’s always the option of changing the predominant GO format — emphasizing less frequent full shutdowns over the endless dribble of one-direction reroutes. With the , the issue is the and Brooklyn. You can’t run the at 5tph, nor can you run Lex-Brooklyn or Jerome that low. So you run 7.5/3/7.5, which itself is really pushing it in terms of flagging capacities. I just wish they’d run 3tph of overlay service as far as 149-GC to complement the 3 of Manhattan service.
  9. Yes. The only GTs in the river portion are southbound between 21st and Roosevelt
  10. Should have been clearer: most tubes have at least some portion of their downhill component timed to 35mph. 60th is an exception — that’s GT45 southbound and GT50 northbound (?). The others you mention just have shorter segments of 35, and then you can wrap it up into the remaining descending/ascending grade and have enough accel time before ascent starts eating your speed.
  11. Yes, but the cause of trains turning at Queens Plaza is pretty irrelevant to the question of whether or not you _can_ turn/they have turned trains at Queens Plaza.
  12. It's possible to operate single track terminals at as much as 15-16tph. If there are delays at 6tph, the fix is fixing operations.
  13. There's an important distinction that should be made here: there is no hard and fast rule that says that you have to have timers on curves and downhills. It may well be good to install them, yes, but it's also entirely possible to design a signal system that allows trains to fly unchecked off steep grades -- see, for example, the southbound around 14, or the express track on the lower Culver line, or northbound Queens Boulevard express. It all just goes back to the issue of control lines: how much stopping distance are you providing for each signal, how fast can trains pass that signal, and how fast can they stop? Regardless, the issue on the nb Franklin-Atlantic express isn't so much the existence of GTs, but their positioning and type. The vast majority of GTs regulating speeds over 20mph or over long(er) stretches of track are 2 shots, as they give ops more room for error and thus allow better track speeds. This isn't true on Franklin-Atlantic. That stretch is ruined by a series of 3 one shots around the curve at Grand Army Plaza. If I'm not mistaken, those signals used to be 2 shots (@Trainmaster5 am I correct on this?), but the second shot was removed, if I had to guess because of a control line (stopping distance) issue. So now we have a variability and slowness generator. That's problem one. Problem two is the one shot in the Atlantic-Barclays station itself. That signal wrecks station entrance speeds (big capacity effect) and once again contributes to variability. Thrown in the mix too are a set of 2 shot GT35s controlling the downgrade into the station. All timers generate variability to some extent, but whatever effect these ones have is totally upstaged by their one shot companions. On a more positive note, all the one shots on this stretch (as well as the one entering Boro Hall) have had countdown aspects installed, which should somewhat help with their operation. Issue is that given the distance between signals around Grand Army Plaza, the numbers on the countdown aren't immediately visible when you enter the timing section -- they become more useful when adjusting your speed as you approach the signal. As for the tube, it has long been NYCT policy to limit trains to 35mph (in most cases) under rivers. I'm honestly unsure as to why this is true. My best guess would be a clearance thing: they don't want to let trains go too fast through the tight clearance environment of a river tube, given the potential for sway. As for why the timers extend so much further nb than they do sb, track geometry? Again, I'm really not totally sure, but it's always been my impression that the nb tube has some weird vertical geometry things going on that its southbound companion does not.
  14. You could also turn using the pocket at Queens Plaza. They did that for a bunch of GOs maybe 2 years ago. , I’d imagine, would be local. Otherwise you’re fully cutting local riders off from 53/60, rather than forcing a transfer.
  15. Would assume as much, but I’m looking for info on merge performance so rush it is.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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