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.

LaGuardia Link N Tra

Senior Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by LaGuardia Link N Tra

  1. My train came in at about 10 Mph today at 63rd Drive-Rego Park. And the operator kept doing that til I got to Roosevelt. I’m scratching my head like “Why is the T/O going so slow?”
  2. Don’t know for the first Question Yes for the Second Question
  3. Other replies are in bold. My definition of a bottleneck is an area in the system that slows things down for everyone and has a negative impact on our subways Capacity such as reducing the number of trains that we can run on a subway line. So bottlenecks in my eyes would include: • Grade Level Merges. • Flying Junctions (Which becomes even worse bottlenecks with Poorly Scheduled trains) • Poor Terminal Operational Practice’s • Poor Signaling (excessive GT’s at Areas where they don’t need to be) • Sharp Curves. • Dwell Times. (Even worse if the Station has a poor Design) Can these bottlenecks be fixed? Not all of them, that’s for sure. But for the ones that can be fixed, what would it take to fix them? It’ll require are a few upgrades and Reroutes if necessary. Anyways, thank you for the feedback, I appreciate it.
  4. Thanks. I rated each bottleneck by how impactful each one is. Green stands for minor bottlenecks, while red is vice versa. Yellow is sorta in the middle.
  5. I though three times before posting this here: Here’s an NYC Subway map that lists all bottlenecks throughout the System. Some bottlenecks include sharp curves, Poor Terminal Operations, or Service’s using interlocking’s at Grade Level. Let me know what you all think of it: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1zW5OcTK4Zkc1_vlH-8LQ73k6UdrhA8hV&usp=sharing
  6. I updated my map of subway bottlenecks, and this should be the complete result. @RR503 @Union Tpke and everyone else, let me know which bottlenecks I missed or need to change so that the information is accurate: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1zW5OcTK4Zkc1_vlH-8LQ73k6UdrhA8hV&usp=sharing
  7. @Union Tpke I updated my map of NYC Subway Bottlenecks, but it's still a work in Progress.
  8. thank you for pointing those bottlenecks out but I recommend reading my last post a little more carefully.
  9. Since this is a thread about subway capacity, I am working on a new map that lists out all bottlenecks that exist in the subway system. Feel free to inform me of any bottlenecks that I might've missed.
  10. Yet they can’t enforce any fare evasion laws....
  11. Has anyone noticed a change in the 14th Street announcement on the and trains with the new transfer (M14A/D+) and whatnot?
  12. I’ve seen a lot of R46’s on the recently. Also, I haven’t really noticed the minor change with the designation on the , though I have seen pictures on Facebook about it. Well. I’ll see for myself tomorrow morning
  13. I agree, but with all the construction around LGA, that won’t be the case for some time.
  14. I read this article earlier and I highly doubt that this reorganization plan will help any New Yorkers. Thanks for bringing this to my attention! It's disgusting that our Governor only wants to associate himself with the when things are going well for them just to make himself look good, Especially when the true credit for NYCT Improvements goes to Byford himself. And when Byford gets credit for improvements, Cuomo wants to get all mad at him for not getting the credit that truly belongs to Byford and HIS team. Not to mention that most of the people that Cuomo hires or appoints to the have little to no knowledge of how the organization works, which is not a good mix with the incompetence that happens over at 2 Broadway. Anyways, I'll see what I can do to help!
  15. Correction. I’m 16, and at least I’m able to provide the information necessary to back up the service changes that RR503, R68, ATH, And I have been proposing. My advice to you is to go out exploring and check out this map, credit to @RR503: https://drive.google.com/file/d/141M8A9PZLVjMokZGTGZGQa1bEhG5ZJf1/view?usp=drivesdk One last thing. If these changes were senseless, we wouldn’t be proposing them in the first place.
  16. So I’m assuming that you think One Seat Rides are more important than operating everything at Maximum throughput with the best efficiency by having simplified services. Okay. Congestion at World Trade Center would only happen if you didn’t send trains in and out in a timely fashion. Currently we turn about 15 TPH at World Trade Center. In reality, it’s capable of turning 26 TPH. Moving the express and adding a would open doors for greater capacity. Also, what’s wrong with boosting service? The whole purpose of these service re-arrangements is to boost service so that we and have a more efficient operating system!! Given that you fix our operating practices to begin with. Aside from Losing a one seat ride from QBL-Broadway. What are these “issues” that you claim would happen?
  17. I’ve actually thought about it in my own time. If anything. We should let the Bus Redesigns be finished first before we move on to the subway System. I might use this concept that you brought up for an idea for a personal project. Speaking of personal Projects, I’m currently working on a line analysis/proposal. When I finish with my draft, along with a map attached to it. I’ll release it in the Proposals thread. Recommended: or > from Roosevelt and points east to Lexington 63rd for the > Union Square > > > Encourage the Free OOS Transfer at Lexington 63rd. to 63rd. > Walk 2-3 blocks to the . Long term, we build a transfer between 63rd and 59th along Lexington.
  18. I'm aware of the ridership demographics along Queens Boulevard and 8th Avenue. I live along the And lines myself and have taken the to Lexington Avenue and points beyond myself. But that doesn't mean that our current service patterns are the most efficient in terms of operations and If anything, you're still missing the bigger picture here. Queens Boulevard and 8th Avenue have flaws because of design flaws and poor Operations Practices (I'm looking at Forest Hills and the Canal Street bottleneck). By putting the service changes discussed, you increase capacity on all lines involved while simplifying the system overall. And regarding 36th Street. Adding one bottleneck vs. Removing 3-4 Bottlenecks,(which I listed below) resulting in MORE TRAINS WHICH EQUAL'S MORE SERVICE is a big difference if you ask me. Also, you didn't answer my question yet. 36th Street (West of the Station) Broadway (Between 34th and 42nd) Queens Plaza Canal Street 53rd Street (between 6th Avenue and 5th Avenue) 59th Street-Columbus Circle (if you count that)
  19. Seems to me like you didn't read a single thing I wrote and that you're either biased or heavily opposed to such changes. The thing about these types of proposals is that you have to look at both the pros and cons. From what it seems, you are very fixated on the cons. I'd suggest checking out these threads so you can get a better understanding of what is wrong with the current way that we run our subway services:
  20. The parts in bold I want to bring up. As a QBL rider myself, I Agree with these changes that could be made. Your argument that these changes are meaningless and will harm the system more than help it are moot. It also seems like you haven't been paying attention to the discussion that's been going on here for the past ... year I believe. I'm going to counter argue your claims about this proposed service re-arrangement. Removing the from Queens Boulevard DOES remove it's benefits of transferring to the Express along Lexington. But that DOES NOT MEAN that there aren't any benefits to such a service change. For starters, you're opening up capacity for a new service along Queens Boulevard. In this case, its the ! Before you go On about how the would cause more congestion consider this Question, What's more important, a One Seat ride with services that are mingled on top of one another and can not operate at maximum efficiency, or a system that has efficient enough to provide the maximum capacity that its capable of while running the most simplistic service patterns possible? This brings me to my next point. While introducing a and moving the to 63rd creates a bottleneck west of 36th Street Station, it allows for more service along the 63rd Street tunnel without screwing over 53rd Street (minus the loss of a one seat ride to 6th Avenue from 63rd Street). With both the and on 63rd Street, riders between Roosevelt and Lexington 63rd no longer need to transfer at Roosevelt unless you take the . As for the , it can be moved to Astoria while the moves to 96th Street with the , becoming a full express north of 34th Street. Like this, you remove a bottleneck on Broadway while increasing the 60th Street tubes and Astoria to it's maximum capacity limit while increasing service on SAS at the same time! Now for the and lines along Central Park West. While its true that moving the express and the local slows down Central Park West, you do receive extra space to add in 4 more trains per hour. but to not screw over passengers north of 145th, you have 2 options: Option 1 is to rearrange and service north of 145th by simply swapping them while leaving the and alone. That in itself has a few benefits and losses, or you can do Option 2 Like @R68OnBroadway has been saying within his last few posts. I'll refer to this article here: So basic conclusion, this deinterlining plan, re-arrangement or simplification of service (or whatever you want to call it) will do more good than harm like you're claiming it would.
  21. Before I share my thoughts, let me get this straight: Commode - (In terms of buses) the one room in the back of the bus that contains a toilet (and maybe a sink) I personally think its a good idea even though (like you said) requires an upkeep in maintenance. I don't ride express buses often, but it sounds like an investment that the should look into, (even if they most likely won't do it)
  22. I don't mean to bump an old thread, but here are some Ideas that I thought of for some potential Light Rail/Street Car corridors. What do you all think? https://drive.google.com/open?id=1UYlBAesQ2JzQScuMtovPgw7aclRo5j_C&usp=sharing
  23. This will go against everything that has been discussed in these last few pages, but I was having a conversation with a friend of mine who had a random thought of what if the was never moved off Brighton and worked a proposal around that. I’ll share it here since this IS the proposals thread. What My Friend Proposed was the Following: - MetroPolitan to CI via Brighton Either or can be moved to 4th Avenue Local to Supplement Service along there. - Follows pre-1976 route to Broadway Junction running alongside the given that Williamsburg could handle more than 24TPH My Criticism with this proposal is that there’s no need for the to go to Brighton and that a Nassau-Bay Ridge service via 4th Avenue is more important at the moment. Not to mention that a new Bottleneck will be introduced at 36th Street and DeKalb’s bottleneck would be worsened by sending either the or via 4th Avenue Local. Lastly, the Service my friend proposed is better off being used for Culver since there was a whole fiasco of bringing Express service to Culver a while back. If the goal is to bring people to Brighton from Williamsburg, then it’s better to Bury the Franklin Avenue and extending it connect with the .
  24. The former I agree with. The latter not so much. Extending the to QBL won’t really help in terms of reliability. First off, you’d be creating a new bottleneck by 63rd Street and making the bottleneck at 36th Street worse. Best sort term idea in terms of making service more reliable is this: to 96th Street with the to Astoria, short turns at Whitehall can be listed as ’s Add a new Service from WTC to Forest Hills. Which will allow for the following: Truncated to WTC. made into the 8th Avenue Express; replaces the past Canal to Euclid. Stays as is. Rerouted via 63rd Street. An alternative would be to make the and the QB Locals and he and the QB Expresses, which would help in Maximizing capacity. The only downside to this proposal is the 36th Street bottleneck and a new bottleneck which would be added at 50th Street. It these issues won’t be too big and still allow for more flexibility compared to the current system.
  • Create New...

Important Information

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