bulk88
-
Posts
165 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by bulk88
-
-
6 hours ago, Lance said:
An in-house transfer between 59 Street and Lexington Av-63 St would require a lot of yo-yo-ing unless the MTA eminent domains the adjacent brownstones along Lexington Ave to facilitate a better transfer. If they don't, the proposed transfer would be forced to utilize the upper level Lexington Ave line platform.
Lexington Av-63 St platforms are underneath the 4/5 59 street tunnel with the 4/5 tunnel underpinned inside 63/Lex. You can hear IRT Exp roll through on the upper level of 63/lex. It would be very simple to just mine/blast a 3 block hallway along the 4/5 tunnel until it exits onto the 59/lex IRT Exp platform. A moving sidewalk, some NYCT is allergic to would make it 1 station on a map.
0 -
18 hours ago, Lex said:
Those are very different (💩) ideas.
But the proposal of Flushing Line converted to Div B with Main Street being destination of either N/W/Q, and leaving Queensboro Plaza to 34 Hudson Yards with Steinway Tubes as Div A, means the IRT Flushing line stub will deadhead to corona yard over Div B tracks.
0 -
On 6/19/2019 at 7:11 PM, Caelestor said:
Assuming the BMT trains are sent to Flushing instead, it's not a terrible idea because most Flushing riders transfer at Queensboro Plaza today. The major downside is that the
wouldn't have a yard.
1968 Plan For Action which involved converting northern half of Pelham line to Div B, Whitlock Avenue going north, to go down NEC to Oak Point yard to SAS, but the 6 train stub that ended at Hunts Point Avenue would deadhead with Div A stock to Westchester Yard every day down the now Div B Pelham express El track.
0 -
On 6/27/2019 at 8:28 PM, Union Tpke said:
Concerning a third track over the bridge... It is possible and can be done, but would cost a lot.
WillyB was built with SIX tracks. Right now it has two tracks.
I've heard of a napkin proposal to rebuild from Marcy to Myrtle to be 4 tracks. J train skips Marcy and Flushing Ave after Myrtle making the J faster for eastern riders. Deinterlining M and J except for going over the bridge (balloon loop). Lorimer and Hewes are closed/combined/rebuilt into a Union Ave, ADA, transfer to G, 2 island new express stop. Flushing Ave has an express track built over the current express track. Myrtle either has a separate M platforms or Islands. Possibly stacked islands (think Queensboro Plaza). Essex Street is rebuilt to 4 tracks so M and J never have a conflict for a platform. There already is a little bit of balloon loop operations already at Essex Street with how M will wait doors open at Essex taking on additional customers while a J passes infront onto WillyB. MacArthur, 12 street ,19 street BART has something similar.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rail_Tracks_map_pattern_24A.svg
An example of balloon looping or simultaneous loading, but most metros that do that only do it for the merge (3 tracks) not for split direction for cost reasons. Since train separation distance is 10-15 seconds, platform dwell time becomes highest capacity limit, not ATP. ^^^^ track layout allows huge dwell times without affecting TPH.
0 -
3 hours ago, Around the Horn said:
There's a lot of areas in New Jersey that frankly should have commuter rail but are only stuck with buses to Port Authority. A frequent train directly to Midtown would make these buses pretty much obsolete.
I don't agree with his plan for subways to Jersey, but they absolutely should be commuter rail.
Bus 163 is a mirror of Pascack Valley line which has 1 track and 2 hour headways, and Teterboro station was intentionally walled off from its residential neighborhood to make sure it was a programmed death. NJT long also decided to abandon diesel rail and replace it with Cruisers that pickup in the heart of residential areas, which rail lines which are surrounded by commercial uses, cant.
0 -
On 5/31/2019 at 9:55 AM, Lance said:
That's not known yet. They haven't finalized the design yet, so it's a bit premature to determine how the conversion process will be completed.
7 line is Thales CBTC wont be used ever again AFAIK by NYCT. L train's Siemens equipment supposedly will be used for rest of Div B and A so what a mainline IRT CBTC R142A is parts wise, is yet unknown. Thrown in LCD ad screens too. If the MTA is very adventurous (not), CCTV too.
0 -
12 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:
That's the $xxx,xxx question. Some of these platforms are very narrow.
The local tunnel/track was shifted outwards at 72 street West IRT to put in elevators on widened platforms. Pretty damn impressive for 21st century extreme costs and penny pinching by MTA.
4 -
Things of bankruptcy that can be done. Changing labor contracts, specifically things like maturity/liquidity (balloon payment as lum sum of pension if condition X is met) which affects how long into future pension assets can be locked up can be done in bankruptcy. Layoffs/seniority/payscale can be changed in bankruptcy. Early terminate managerial staff yearly contracts. Rebid maintenance contracts (assuming no vendor lockin hahahaha) before they expire naturally. Terminate a material supply contract that supplies obsolete parts that will be dumpstered on arrival. Defaulting on property leases. Void a vehicle mortgage without paying remaining interested or principal as a penalty for default/repo (probably limited to 4 wheel off the shelf MTA non truck non bus vehicles).
Typical recipe of bankruptcy is if bonds are tiers/category/priority, lowest tranche is defaulted or interest cancelled.
0 -
MTA does O/D by PM entry swipe, and assigns PM entry swipe as exit location of AM swipe. Assigning express vs local, and which transfer is used is another whole set of controversy. IIRC N is 2 minutes faster to Time Sq than 7 from Queensboro Plaza, but you always take 1st that shows up, since there are 2-3 7s for every N and the sheer frequency of the 7, the 7 will win, do not let a 7 pass waiting for the N. Also 6th ave. B/D DO NOT beat a parallel local F/M between 34 and West 4, or at best 15 seconds faster.
0 -
On 5/24/2019 at 4:19 PM, WestFarms36 said:
another thing that complicates the use is if a student looses their Student MetroCard, the school secretaries which are responsible to distribute them, are just nasty and anal about giving a new one to the students, and I wish the distribution would be handled directly by the
for more accessibility, and simplicity. Other agencies mail student passes to their home, as opposed to NY, where you have no choice, but to beat the fare on the first few days of school because you receive your Student MetroCard once you're in school on the first few days.
Private schools blindly distribute 3 trips to all students regardless of distance. IME if you loose your green card at the private school, they will punish you with the half fare one until AFC cancels your original green card. Some young or short looking teachers also got away with using green cards as a job perk. Yes the cards are issued 1st or 2nd day of school, but how did you get to school to pick one up? You still have to carry gold, or just jump since your local station airside is a weed and heroin and drinking no brown bag trap.
0 -
16 hours ago, RR503 said:
No, it should start when the train starts.
With me living at 179 street GTFS/Beacon/ITRAC vs dispatcher bell has some fraud going on. Bell rings, sometimes trains leave 45 sec to 2 mins before GTFS scheduled departure with 1-2 mins left on the clock. Sometimes the SB F is held with hold lights at 75th avenue or Union since it got to the merge "too fast". Travel time from Origin to 2nd station would be very unstable since trains leave earlier than scheduled for OTP.
0 -
On 5/9/2019 at 11:01 PM, 7LineFan said:
I'm pretty sure we have 2+1 seating on most if not all (local) buses. The issue for me is the seating over the wheels on the articulateds: the New Flyers have 2+2 while the Novas go longitudinal, and because of that the New Flyers feel so cramped inside while it's so much easier to move around in an LFSA. I take the Q44 on the regular and I hated when Stengel gave up their LFSAs for New Flyers.
Also regarding the lack of offset doors on B division stock--that puzzles me as well since all A division NTTs have it. Perhaps it has something to do with wider doors and a certain number of seats required?
Private RTSes were 2x2 always. NYCT RTSes were 2x1.
0 -
TRB's ideal design is BART/DC Metro 21st century layout. Traverse on the end for bums to nod off on dope, cattle in the middle with no seats. MTA would prefer no seats at all, see 42 Shuttle. Traverse only came back in 70s and 80s because ridership was so low, capacity wasn't needed, and load guidelines weren't created yet which say to cut trains until SRO (at 10pm) or 20 minute headways are reached.
4 -
18 hours ago, trainfan22 said:
One improvement the 179s have over previous NTT car classes no one talks about is the HAVC is MUCH quieter, the HAVC on the older NTT car classes can be deafening.
True. R160 HVAC sounds like a diesel loco. MTA mustve put a spec on the loudness of them for R179. Heated seats and the softer suspension are the other improvements. R179s are a ground up design by Bombardier. R160s are simply R143s with a FIND display, different shade of wallpaper inside, and diff end doors. All other engineering and parts and hardware is the same. The R179 is a virgin design.
0 -
4 hours ago, R68OnBroadway said:
Sending the
via 63rd is an awful idea. In doing this not only have you combined two unreliable lines onto one set of tunnels but have also added a merge at 57th and 63rd. Doing this with 
would be a bit better but still an awful idea as that 63rd merge would unnecessarily interline and kill capacity.
If trackbed was filled in so 63 broadway trains could reach local track at 57/7, R via 63 would fix N/W capacity/congestion problems for once, along with a switch south of Astoria Blvd to allow center track relaying. 63rd tunnel, Rutgers, and Montague are the only not maxed out East River tunnels.
0 -
4 hours ago, Lawrence St said:
Can I have what your having? Asking for a friend.
Rattan from the transit museum in a rose.
0 -
MBTA and MTA are in talks to do a fleet swap between the Red Line and Crosstown as CRRC cars are delivered to Boston as a budget move for Fast Forward. R68s will goto Q and W, R46 reefed, and R179s to Franklin Shuttle and H train.
13 -
3 hours ago, RR503 said:
the availability of flex capacity and competence in incident response play large roles too. The latter things are very much functions of operation and signal design, and not so much ones of the initial failure.
Competence. BIE (this case was MOW equip on ROW). T/O sits in cab until RTO radios "train at B4-XXX identify yourself", only then triage/track occupancy protocol happens. OT baby.
0 -
On 4/8/2019 at 12:31 PM, RR503 said:
I've seen some *really* fast track turnovers on the
during the AM rush) with today's signalling; the question I think is more about demand and car availability. Culver CBTC will definitely help increase capacity in the area, but again, do we need more trains?
South Culver Express was the original CBTC test area before it was installed on the L train. South Culver later became the multi vendor (siemens vs thales) VOBC/Wayside interoperability certification area, but I believe that contract was a bust and there has never been interoperability so except for 7, rest of NYCT will be Siemens CBTC. So the ONLY reason South Culver is getting CBTC, leaving a gap with old signals from Jay to Church, is since it was the CBTC test grounds. Not for capacity, not for "old signals", not for reliability. It would simply be changing boards in wayside equipment from pre-spec hardware revisions to current spec.
0 -
Why not lengthen Broad, Fulton, Chambers and Canal to 10 cars (or 11 or 12 hehehe), reopen canal east platform, install switches south of chambers for Montague service to goto Chambers east platform. Then continue and terminate at Canal (NQ, very long walk, R/W) for Broadway access. No switching conflict with J. And puts the 4 tracks to use. This setup I drew is more for emergency service changes that knock out Broadway or Manhattan Bridge rather than a permanent Nassau R. Anything from Dekalb can be drained through Montague to terminate at Canal. Sort of like 96/2 is the universal drain of 6th and broadway service during emergencies.
2 -
bulk88's Nassau R deinterline trackmap
View File
bulk88's Nassau R deinterline trackmap
-
Submitter
-
Submitted04/05/2019
-
Category
0 -
-
1 hour ago, Eric B said:
I don't quite get what this is we're looking at. This is looking in the ceiling?
Yes. Looking at the ceiling from 63/Lex platform upper level.
0 -
22 hours ago, Lance said:
I'm just trying to envision how such a transfer passageway would fit with the existing infrastructure in the area. Obviously it would have to flank the Lexington Ave tunnels, but unless its construction coincides with new developments between 63rd Street and 60th Street, it's going to be much more difficult to build such a passageway, as it would have to run beneath the basements of the brownstones along that stretch of Lexington Ave.
Lex Express tracks are above, and in "the ceiling" at 63 lex upper level. It wouldn't be hardest thing to mine some more rock and build a hallway on the side of the Lex Express tracks (with a wall for noise) to its platform at 59.
1 -
23 hours ago, RR503 said:
SCS is, I guess, Canadian speak for ATC, or pulse code signalling. NYCT actually was going to do something along these lines in the '70s, but then the financial crisis happened. That's why the 44s were geared for such high speeds; they expected a performance boost from ATC.
I cant tell from TTC's PDFs and contracts if TTC's/Thales "SCS" is PRR <200 Hz metronome pulse code (#1 purpose anti-collision, PSR secondary purpose) or no electricity, no relays, no track circuits, magnetic indusi transponders (no anti-collision function, only PSR). PDFs hint its unenergized baise with a wheel counter, maybe GPS, and PSR DB in a VOBC (ACSES over dark territory without ATC/ATP/cab signals). No radio link, no track loop link. TTC states "SCS" has "blue light" MOW function in its contract spec, but still, that would be an un-energized Balise clamped in the track bed temporarily by MOW in the simplest implementation.
0
wouldn't have a yard.
for more accessibility, and simplicity. Other agencies mail student passes to their home, as opposed to NY, where you have no choice, but to beat the fare on the first few days of school because you receive your Student MetroCard once you're in school on the first few days.
via 63rd is an awful idea. In doing this not only have you combined two unreliable lines onto one set of tunnels but have also added a merge at 57th and 63rd. Doing this with 
would be a bit better but still an awful idea as that 63rd merge would unnecessarily interline and kill capacity.
during the AM rush) with today's signalling; the question I think is more about demand and car availability. Culver CBTC will definitely help increase capacity in the area, but again, do we need more trains?
MTA's Overtime costs blamed on Inept Management
in New York City Subway
Posted
Is MTA a civilian employer or law enforcment? Does an Inspector General have subpeona/discovery/law enforcement power? HIPPA is nearly wothless as everyone waves all their rights when they sign up for insurance. All HIPPA does is stop glossy viagra ads & smoking settlement lawsuit flyers in the mail.