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.

AlgorithmOfTruth

Senior Member
  • Content Count

    312
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

163 Excellent

Profile Information

  • Location
    Queens, NY

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I thought the R42s were officially retired on 12/30/19?! Those trains either have a habit of surviving, or I believe people more easily than I thought. Either way, I'm happy that they got a chance to shine in the sun again.
  2. For it to work, it would involve trains using the express track southbound for the AM rush, say from 6:00 AM to 10:00 AM and northbound at all other times except during overnight hours (10 AM through 10 PM using the middle express track and 10 PM through 6 AM using the local tracks).
  3. As we all know, the train runs express along the Grand Concourse during rush hours in the peak direction. During said time, the train runs local all the way to/from 145th Street and Bedford Park Boulevard. I feel that service along the Grand Concourse could be better executed though by having trains run express in The Bronx full-time with trains taking over the local tracks to Bedford Park Boulevard. During overnight hours, trains would make all local stops to/from Norwood-205th Street like they already do now. I am thinking of potential issues, like passengers disliking the fact that express trains don't realize 161st Street-Yankee Stadium, (high ridership station) severing their connection to the train. You could theoretically run both and trains local to 161st Street, then have trains switch to the express track thereafter to avoid that problem, but the speed restriction protecting the interlocking causes the whole thing to die. Any thoughts?
  4. What truly concerns me about all this are those "non-stop" sections that these planners have made so commonplace in the name of quote on quote route efficiency. It doesn't help people at all when they have to walk even further to reach a bus stop than they normally would in sacrifice of runtime. I might be a bit harsh in critiquing this new proposal draft, but I am calling out BS on the majority of it. I get the impression that the MTA is trying to pull something NICE with this crap. Nothing really creative, more like take apart and rearrange...
  5. Wait, you actually can make it to Northern Boulevard from the Q27 (without having to dip/swipe your MetroCard 3 times) by transferring to the Q31 at 48th Avenue/Bell Boulevard, even though the Q31's headways suck.
  6. I don't mean to discredit this, but I don't know if that necessarily means those R42 sets are absolutely and permanently out of passenger service. They were laid up at Pitkin Yard earlier this year for one reason or another.
  7. @B35 via Church, I've been wanting to ask, what are your thoughts on demographic travel patterns in Queens relative to a bus route's overall effectiveness? For example, consider the proposed route travelling primarily along Springfield Boulevard to Fort Totten. I can be wrong, but I don't think residents from Queens Village and Cambria Heights in the proximity of Springfield Boulevard will be seeking destinations north of Queensborough Community College with regularity. I say this because I used the Q27 to get to class at QCC for a few years and most of the passengers who boarded the bus south of Union Turnpike were off by the time we reached the college, where a new ridership base was regenerated - students seeking Flushing and the . With the proposal severing this connection with Flushing, I don't know if the ridership will be sufficient enough to go through with the route alteration.
  8. You might be fond of long, winding subway lines, but adding length comes with a host of factors that have a bad habit of destroying reliability on said lines when pressure is applied on them. What we want is for our subway lines to run as efficiently as possible, period. Some of the longest lines in the system fall victim to a mutual problem in particular: merging. An easy way to maintain that issue along a line is to ensure it's long enough to suffer through multiple "choke points."
  9. I'm completely with you on that. The 62s and 68A's are very likely the best braking trains in their respective divisions. A bit of tweaking and they'll perform even better. However, they are aging, and ultimately, are not compatible with the modern hardware needed for ATO. I believe that's the reason why the isn't jumping on the idea of refurbishing them—CBTC.
  10. I'm grateful for NYCTransitForums existing, as I learn a lot on here, but the moment a fleet swap update is posted, many users on here assume the position of a supervisor working for the in the car equipment and assignment unit. Consequently, you have people getting into emotional duels on here claiming they're 100% certain that car class x will go to yard y and vice versa. Patience is a vital component of maturity!
  11. The primary goal of open-gangway subway cars is to increase passenger capacity by utilizing the existing space in between cars. Frankly, the couldn't care less about unpleasant aromas flowing through their trains, so as long they safely get people from point A to point B in a timely manner. I wish the had tested the open-gangway concept back in the 90s with the R110s.
  12. No, not everyday. They come and go. They utilize the act of surprise to bust fare beaters. While they might be stationed at particular bus stops, their presence is random.
  13. ATTENTION: Please be advised, there is an Eagle Team posted at 155th Street/Amsterdam Avenue enforcing payment of fare along the Bx6-SBS route. Just looking out for my fellow transit buffs to ensure that they stay out of trouble. Have a great day guys.
  14. It's called the random thoughts thread for a reason dude... He didn't post anything out of line...
  15. I've noticed a few spots throughout the system where T/O's are getting a bit too comfortable challenging timers. All it takes is for one signal to clear a hair slower to end your career due to careless underestimation. I don't care if I've been on the job for 25+ years and know my line inside and out without ever having suffered a safety-related incident on my employee record. No amount of experience would offer me the chance to operate in an audacious manner. Signals have a greater tendency to malfunction with age, and since it isn't clear if they've been inspected appropriately at periodic intervals, I find it reckless to assume they will clear because "you know they will, as you've seen how they behave numerous times already."
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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