LGA Link N Train

5 hours ago, RTOMan said:

That's part of the Delay..

Somebody forgot that the G has five car units that goes to Culver Yard for lay ups..

Oh well i dont get paid enough to worry about such things...

Guess we wait until Option 1 for the 211 order I guess.

7 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

Right, because QBL CBTC can't recognize a 5 car train but Culver CBTC can? What type of backwards engineering is that!

Hopefully the  is 8 or 10 cars by that point. Also we don’t know if Culver CBTC will be able to recognize a 5 Car Train as of yet.

7 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

Or...hear me out...EXTEND THE .

Now I know why it can't happen because of the communication issues allowing line ups to/from Crosstown with CBTC, but if it was that big of an issue, they should have waited until they fixed it to do the 63rd St project.

I personally would have kept the on Queens Blvd at all times during the service change, with select ones ending at Bedford-Nostrand to keep up with consistent service.

There aren’t enough trains to run  Trains to Continental. On top of that, CBTC won’t register 5 Car trains as being a full train…

Both of these things have been established before…

15 hours ago, danielhg121 said:

No idea this existed. Thanks for sharing! Lots of information on projects we're all curious about.

Yup, its been around for a while so have fun exploring contracts and plans from the current capital program dating back to past Capital Programs

As of December 2023, this is what I can say is the current status regarding Systemwide CBTC Installation in the Subway System with the Information that I have and according to the Capital Dashboard website. I'll be focusing mostly on the status of the lines themselves and won't go too much into the nitty griddy of whats going on:  

• Canarsie Line  - 100% Complete
• Flushing Line  - 100% Complete
• Queens Blvd Line (West) - 97% Complete Phase 1 is Complete while Phase 2 is 94% Complete. Software issues with the line in regards to interoperability between the 2 Suppliers. (Siemens and Thales) So Contractors have to make minor software updates in the Zone Controllers between 50 St-08 Av and Kew Gardens-Union Tpke
• Culver Line  - 82% Complete Inconsisencies between the Track ties and the Rails are whats holding this project back from going Online. In addition. the Bergen Street SSI/Interlockings are either undergoing or are set to undergo a Replacement. I swear, that thing fails like, every other day...
• 8th Avenue Line  - 75% Complete Main thing holding this project back is the delay in the R-211 Order which is its own fiasco. Besides that, an ongoing GO on A5 Track is still occuring. (If that has anything to do with the New Relay Room, then I wouldn't be surprised). The Interlockings/Switch north of 42nd-8th, connecting D3 Track to A1/A3 Tracks have been replaced. (IDK the Switch Number to be exact). Also, some Zone Controllers/SSI Equipment are up in some locations whereas others are in the process of being installed. Last time I had a job at Canal Street RR, the SSI and Zone Controllers weren't even ready yet. IDK if thats changed.
• Queens Blvd Line (East) -29% Complete TBH I haven't kept up with too much lately regarding this project. AFAIW, installation started in March, saw a ton of wires hanging out from Briarwood-Van Wyck. Also heard from our fellow RTO Employee's here that Parsons Blvd (Hillside) has a Zone Controller now. Does that mean it also has an SSI or no?
• Crosstown Line  - 6% Complete Work literally just started on this line a week ago or so, but I've noticed that Transponders are all over the line now. Also, 3 Interlockings are planned to be replaced. The Nassau Avenue and BedNos Relay Rooms are set to be decomissioned and thats about as far as I know regarding Crosstown. IK Contracotrs have something set up at 21-Van Alst so I wouldn't be surprised if I saw a CBTC room or a Train Control Room show up there at some point.
• Fulton Street Line - 0% Complete While the lawsuit from NJ against Congestion Pricing may or may not delay this project. Its good that it'll complement 8th Avenue CBTC. Transponders are already Set up and a few Interlockings (Most notable the Jay Street Interlockings) are due for an upgrade/replacement, which will affect the and Lines given that they're in the area. Beyond that, I know little to nothing of this project.
• 6th Avenue/63rd Street Line's  -  0% Complete IIRC, the Interlockings and Switches around 34th Street and West 4th got funding for replacements/upgrades back in June. (My memory is a bit fuzzy on that so forgive me on that.) Outside of that and that the new Dispatch Tower at 34th-6th has been active for some time, I am completely in the dark on this project. 
  
  Thats pretty much it on the status of each project. I'm not going to mention any CBTC Projects that were postponed for Future Capital Plans. I am still working on a comprehensive timeline for my CBTC Progression Sheet but otherwise, its coming along nicely: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1rJ6Pm3XYACHCyMT-WdW8PSEiLuGckFw4rCb_xNtySqo/edit#gid=0

With consideration as to what @ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ, @Kamen Rider and @Nova Fly Guy have all said, wouldn’t it be a combination of all factors that explain why the  is so problematic? 
 

At the very least it isn’t the LEAST reliable subway line by any margin, not anymore that is. 

On 12/15/2023 at 11:41 PM, Lawrence St said:

Is it really necessary to be putting CBTC on the ?

Considering the fact that the  has some of the oldest signals in the system on top of being Sandwiched in between 2 already existing CBTC Zones (although Culver is a bit of a Special Case atm), yes. Yes it is.

Why not just move Marcy to the West above the Bus Terminal, easing the curve in the process. 

J3-4 Track can be extended to where 140/141 Signals are located with 3 new Switches in the Area. J1 and J2 can be Modified to have Wider curves and 2 new platforms will go in between the 3 tracks. 
 

All  Facilities within the area (i.e. the Bus Terminal and the Station) can be consolidated into 1 General area. 863 and 865 Switches might become redundant in this proposal now that I think of it…

Given that the implementation of CBTC has recently begun on the Crosstown Line beween Court Square and Church Avenue, I'd figure that I share my CBTC Progression chart once more! The timeline is a little bit incomplete but otherwise good.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1rJ6Pm3XYACHCyMT-WdW8PSEiLuGckFw4rCb_xNtySqo/edit?usp=sharing

A more mundane proposal…. Coming to think of it, most of my proposals have become increasingly Mundane as of late whenever I do propose something.

Alright, so check it out. Norwood-205th Street was never intended to be a Terminal Station. This is evident by the fact that there is a max capacity of 10 TPH that can be turned around if I’m not mistaken. If anyone knows from previous proposals, the IND Concourse Line was planned to go past 205th and under Burke Avenue to at the very least Gun Hill Road. 

Another thing that makes 205th a bad terminal is that it doesn’t have Crew Rooms or space for any to my knowledge. Thus,  train Crews will have to change at Bedford Park, thus adding to Dwell times in that station. 
 

I propose adding 1 Extra stop on the Concourse Line, we’ll call it “Williamsbridge-White Plains Road”!

Williamsbridge-White Plains Road would achieve a few things here. First and foremost, the track and platform layout will be set up like 34th Street-Hudson Yards on the , with Diamond Crossovers on both ends of an Island Platform Station with at least 1500’ worth of Layup Tracks to store an extra 4 trains During Off Peak Hours. 
 

In the Mezzanine Level, the main thing that will be included is a Transfer to Burke Avenue Station on the  and  to allow passengers to transfer, but thats not the main point of why I’m proposing this station. Although the added transfer would be a bonus. What WILL be included on the Mezzanine is an additional Room for Crews to Switch out between Trains, maybe a back up Dispatch Tower, although that might be unnecessary with Bedford Park being the primary Tower for Concourse I presume. Last But not least, in the same area that the new Crew Room would be located, you can also throw in a Signal, Track and/or Third Rail Quarters for good Measure. 
 

Anyways, TL;DR, extend the  East to White Plains Road to build a new Crew Room and give it a better Terminal in the process, the added transfer to the  and  is just a bonus.

On 11/11/2023 at 11:07 PM, MTA Researcher said:

*sigh* I thought that you were sticking to the status quo. But since you say you are bored; let us talk!

I was being satire when I said that.

On 11/11/2023 at 11:07 PM, MTA Researcher said:

Call me ignorant, but in this proposal; I assume you are eliminating the lower level? Or vice versa?

Ok, allow me to back track and add some context cause I don't think you understood the proposal.

For Context, tracks in the New York City Subway follow a certain pattern with chains being used to represent the Segment of a line. In the A Divison, tracks are normally labled "1, 2, 3, 4" (1 and 2 Tracks for Southbound Travel and 3 and 4 Tracks for Northbound Travel) if we're talking about a trunk line or "1, M, 2" for Triple Tracked portions of lines. On the B Division, Tracks are Ordered as "1, 3, 4, 2" for Trunk Lines (and "1, 3-4, 2" for Triple Tracked Sections), similar rule applies here but with the order Switched as Tracks 1 and 3 are Southbound and 4 and 2 are Northbound. 

Now each segment of a line follows what is called a "Chain" which in laymens terms, is used to measure how long a portion of track lasts from a specific Starting Point. It can get confusing when certain lines start with the same letter for a Chain, for example the BMT A chain represents the Broadway Line while the IND A Chain represents the 8th Avenue/Fulton Street Lines. So that in mind, tracks would be numbered "A1 Track" or "A2 Track", etc.. 

What I am proposing is that a portion of A1 and A2 Track (which in this context are the 8th Avenue Local Tracks) are removed in 50th Street with the exchange of Extended Platforms and 2 New Switches North of the Station merging A1 with A3 and A2 with A4 Tracks. 50th Lower Level from where the Branches off from the and  into the station uses D3 and D4 Tracks, which are part of the IND D Chain, which consists of every piece of track starting from 50th-8th LL up until Jamaica-179th Street. D1 and D2 Tracks start just NORTH of Court Square on the indicating thats where the Crosstown Line ends and where the Queens Blvd Local Tracks begin. 

On 11/11/2023 at 11:07 PM, MTA Researcher said:

Speaking of 8 Av, how would you rate the following proposal?

  unchanged

 BPB - WTC: local

 JC - Euclid Av: QBL/8 Av Exp - Fulton St Lcl

From my eyes; this allows for 8 Av to have access to local and express going upper manhattan and preserves 6 Av to go express along CPW and into Bronx. Queens Benefits from this as they have direct access to Midtown Express, not to mention upper and lower levels of 50 St have service. Only downside is the second CPW local would have to be eliminated unless we connect Broadway Local north of 57 St/7 Av to CPW local. There are provisions north of 57 St that could allow something like that to happen.

Main Problem with this proposal is that Cranberry doesn't have the space to fit that many Trains. To my knowledge and with the current set up, Cranberry only has the Capacity to fit 26 TPH. Cramming 2 of the busiest lines in the system would not do well for riders of either line as you'd have to reduce Capacity on both although I'm unsure if any outside factors play into mind such as the Track Geometry Surrounding Canal Street on the and and whatnot. Plus you'd be having the do more than it should.

As for Uptown, I'm assuming you want to swap the and  again? Once we get all 211's on the Property and Trains are extended to 10 Cars, sure no Problem but I'd Hold off until then. Also that last part I'm Crossing out entirely because I believe that Broadway Service should Have NO Business reverse branching onto CPW. 

Here’s a rather pointless proposal that I’ll throw out (because I’m bored). How much it’ll cost and the impacts it’ll have System-Wide and wether or not it is even feasible to begin with are things that I will not be accounting for here so enjoy.
 

A portion A1 and A2 Tracks along 8th Avenue is removed from North of 50th Street to right where the ‘s D3/D4 Tracks Join 8th Avenue. In place of the Absent Portions of A1/A2 Tracks will be extended Platforms for 50th Street. As for A1/A2 NORTH of 50th Street, they will join A3/A4 Tracks via new Switches as to not hit a dead end. At this point, the Station would Act a LOT like the IND Nostrand Avenue Station in Brooklyn. The only real Service Change here at the BARE MINIMUM would be that  and Late Night  Trains would now run express between 59th Street-Columbus Circle to Hoyt-Schemerhorn. For any of you folks that love to deinterline the system, here’s a nice starting grounds for you so go crazy.

On 11/6/2023 at 9:05 PM, trainfan22 said:

From what I understand, some parts of the IND still has the original signals from the IND was built where's the J line signals was redone in the 90s. Concourse is IND and is not getting CBTC, it's signal system was redone in the 90s also.

 

Every line in the system will get CBTC at some point, but some sections are prioritized more than others obviously 

Crosstown CBTC is underway

Here’s a better proposal that every rider in the system can agree on.

  - All stay as is

Yes. This IS the status Quo but the main takeaway from what I’m seeing is here is that while the current setup has its issues, its set up the way it is for a reason. While some proposals here would address some of said issues, new issues would arise and take their place. But thats not a bad thing in of itself, as there will always be someone who opposes some type of change to the system. 

Ultimately at the end of the day, we all want to see a more reliable system.

11 minutes ago, MTA Researcher said:

Is it me or is the MTA really a dictatorship?

No. It’s a Public Benefit Corporation. 

5 hours ago, Ale188 said:

This is too early! I swear!

Too early? The R-44's are literally falling apart. 

Speaking of which, I gotta railfan in Staten Island one of these days before the Rest of the R-211S's begin to Roll Out.

So I'm thinking about Livonia Yard and IRT Capacity in Brooklyn.

- The Facility itself is outdated since it can't house cranes nor does it have enough space to maintain the HVAC units on the 142's. Found out from a buddy of mine a while ago that you'd have to sit on a bucket or Squat to perform any maintence on the 62's in Livonia. (Never been to Livonia nor am I a part of Car Equipment so IDK how true that statement is).

- I remember reading from the 20 YN Report that a bunch of makeshift Office Space, Wash Rooms and Locker Rooms exist and only 1 Boiler to heat the place up. 

- There's no Car Wash there so that explains the random Trains that get sent to the Bronx Every Now and then.

So with that in mind, I am in favor of a full rebuild of the facility, but with Livonia being the ONLY IRT Maintenance Facility in Brooklyn, I wonder how that would affect capacity in Brooklyn on top of MDBF's for Rolling Stock that have to travel down there anyways. The idea of a New Yard/Maintenance Facility for the IRT would be nice but is heavily dependent on a Utica or Nostrand Extension IMO.

I also find it interesting how has been aware of Livonia's Problems for years, I'm guessing it took them some time to come up with a comprehensive plan to address its issues?

10 hours ago, NBTA said:

Where the hell would that  train terminate northbound?

Wakefield-241st Street

10 minutes ago, MJHmarc said:

Just keep this in mind people…the MTA President has already announced there will be no changes to service after the manhattan congestion pricing starts. He went on a late morning tv new program and said there’s plenty off room in the system for more people with additional service than what’s running now. 

That doesn’t sound very promising at all. 

I'm curious about something. 

What do the RTO Folks here think of the 's "Proposal" for Rogers Junction?

42 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

What are you going on about? uses the same power system like we do. And for heavens sake, stop calling it a railroad. Logically, It hasn't been a railroad since the North Shore was abandoned. 

 considers it one and Operates it as if it were Such…

On 9/27/2023 at 10:23 PM, MTA Researcher said:

Glad you asked. Here’s the full proposal:

 

 207 - Lefferts: CPW/8 Av/Fulton St Exp via Cranberry St Tunnel

 205 - Far Rock: Concourse/CPW/8 Av/Fulton St Exp

 JC - Euclid Av: QBL Exp, 53 St, 8 Av/Fulton St Lcl via new Tunnel south of WTC that would connect to abandoned Hoyt St Local tracks and continue via Fulton St Local

 and  already mentioned

  179 - CI: As is with potential for more Culver Exp 

 extended to 71 Av

 R.I.P

  Already mentioned

 and  already mentioned

  125  - CI: 2 Av/Bway/4 Av Lcl via Montague St Tunnel and West End

 and  already mentioned

 

If   to 71 Av is bad; then check this out:

Turquoise Q train: 71 Av - BB: QBL Lcl - 2 Av/Brighton Exp via North Side of Manhattan bridge along with  , thus absorbing  .

[Z] Fordham Plaza - Hanover Sq: via Bronx/ 2 Av Lcl in which case:  via Bronx Exp

The  and Turquoise Z would go via 3rd Av in Bronx

 

Well this is what is currently in my mind. Tell me your thoughts

Alrighty, I’ve decided that I’ll throw my own 2 cents into the matter.

I’ll start with CPW first since that’s the easiest thing to comprehend here. I see you’ve taken the Liberty to Deinterline 59th Street. While I’m not entirely opposed to the idea, it goes against the IND’s Design Philosophy when it comes to the design of their track Layouts and what not, at least you compensate by providing both 8th and 6th Service to both Branches north of 145th and 8th. Would be a shame if nothing Served 50th Upper Level though….
 

The  Line…. WTC/Hudson Terminal’s position is at the same Grade Level as Cortlandt Street on the  Lines, so this means you’ll have to either bore a new tunnel under Church Street or royally screw over Broadway Local Riders in order to get the  to connect to Fulton Local. Honestly any plan involving adding a new East River Tube to Fulton Local should either involve Whitehall or SAS. Anything other than that is overkill.

Credit where Credit is due, at least you didn’t Squeeze all of 8th Avenue into the Cranberry Tubes.

QBL and 6th Avenue…. I’m assuming you want to increase  Service by Sending the back to Nassau and having the  take over QB Local with the  . A big point I want to address here. 

• While travel between the outer boroughs has been steadily increasing since COVID, I’m not sure if Ridership is high enough to replace the  with the . Not to mention that 53rd Street would be getting a Service Cut under this proposal, given that it has a much higher demand compared to 63rd Street, that is a Non-Starter.

Now for BMT East. There’s quite a bit happening here that I disagree with.

Its important to remember that due to the Infrastructure surrounding the Williamsburg Bridge, we’re working with a hard Capacity Limit of 24 TPH. Which means we can’t do too much here.

You have your  Train to Broadway Junction, your  Train to Parsons/Archer and your  to Metro via Nassau…. If we wanna get 24 TPH, you’d need:

: 6 (minimum) 

: 6

: 12

Okay Fair Enough although you’d need to play with Myrtle Junction, and Expand some platforms here and there. The Cost;Benefit Ratio of this I don’t believe is high enough to justify this especially when the problems with the  lies more within its infrastructure rather than the Route itself. 6th Avenue is popular with BMT East but not enough to Justify rebuilding Chrystie Street. Speaking of which:

Your SAS proposal with the  leans too heavily with Fantasyland which makes it hard for me to take Seriously.

Also Bronx doesn’t really NEED a 3rd Avenue Subway. Many railfans propose that just to right an old wrong when the nearby Metro North Corridor on Park Avenue has a lot of Untapped Potential. I do agree with Subway Service to Co-Op City but that’s better achieved by sending the  Up there (or if you wanna be fancy, send the  past 205th to Co-Op city given that 205th was never intended to be a Terminal in the first place)

Now Broadway…. If you’re going to Propose the 57th Street Flip, then I would leave the  on 2nd Avenue or the  in Bay Ridge. If any Service is going to get the Boot on Broadway, it will be the  first. Also Deinterlining DeKalb loses all merit when SAS replace’s 6th Avenue. While I understand that the current Plans for SAS lack GOOD transfers with other lines, sending it to South Brooklyn at the expense of the  and  isn’t a good idea. 
 

All in all, I DO take lots of issues with this proposal as you’re tampering with a lot of things that don’t need to be tampered with.

On 9/27/2023 at 10:38 PM, Kamen Rider said:

Yeah… um… reading that… as a transit worker… specifically RTO… yeah you don’t want to know my thoughts. 

 

At all…

I do. 

Simple one but not much merit to it.

Re-Open and Refurbish the Abandoned Mezzanine of 21st-Van Alst on the  Line. Extra Set of Cameras to keep an eye on the South Side of the station.

The 160 Delivery was finished over 10 years ago so I don’t really see the need for a thread.