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.

'89 Liberty MCI

Veteran Member
  • Content Count

    610
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

1 Follower

About '89 Liberty MCI

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Thanks AE. Why would Eastern be a time point for the LTD if it does not stop there? I guess they mean St. John's Pl or they mean they want you to leave St. John's Pl a minute before you are supposed to pass Eastern or whatever. Weird. I knew the time points on New York had NY instead of NA, funny how I did not realize until just now that NYCHA also stands for New York City Housing Authority.
  2. The lines that have only four time points on the bus operator paddles also have only four time points on the passenger schedules, at those same locations. See mta.info. The B44 has a time point at Eastern Pkwy? For the limited I thought the time points on the paddles were Plaza ("WAPLZ"?), Flushing ("LYNCH"), Fulton ("NAFST"), Empire ("NAEPR"), Church ("NACHA"), Newkirk ("NAAVD"), Flatbush ("NAFLA"), and I do not know the time points south of Junction. Are the local time points different from the limited time points on the B44? On the Bx1, 2 (when it had a LTD), and 41, the local time points are the same as the LTD time points. If Eastern Pkwy is a regular time point for the B44 local (not just for AM rush hour local trips that begin at Eastern, which are listed in the passenger schedules), then this is my first time hearing about a local that has a time point that its limited counterpart does not have. SBS routes also have very few time points on the passenger schedules, and I was told that the bus operator paddles have very few time points. Probably the same time points that are on the passenger schedules. Also I was told that they do not hold SBS buses at time points, as that would defeat the purpose of SBS. Unless of course one bus catches up with another bus. In that case, technically, the second one should fall back so that the passenger distribution is even.
  3. Thanks Two-Timer. It is satisfying to finally know why the acts up so much on the weekends. The trains always leave Flatbush on time though. During the week, (3)s are often scheduled to be no more than 2-3 minutes in front of (2)s on northbound trips. I guess this is done in order to relieve crowding on the since it basically goes on a whole new adventure after 135 Street while the makes just two stops. I know (2)s sometimes go express on Nostrand during the weekday rush hour in order to make up for lost time, but I never knew they went express on EP. Also I have never heard of (3)s skipping any stops in Brooklyn at any time outside the weekday rush and GOs. I know if they run EXP on Nostrand they have to stop at Newkirk to punch the or button on the route selector, but why do they stop at President if the ridership at that station is so low, the station is two little blocks away, it takes longer to get to/from street level there than at most other stations, and there is no route selector for southbound trains there? It would make much more sense to stop at Sterling instead.
  4. East New York, Triboro is correct. I do not know what the deal is with the sometimes; they can be very erratic. Saturday I took a from 96 St to Grand Army Plaza and the board said the next to Zoo Lots was due up in 5 minutes, and the next to Flatbush was due up in 18 minutes. Not good. Weird how they would allow 13 minutes to pass before any 7th Ave EXP/Eastern Pky LCL shows up, when each line is supposed to operate every 12 minutes weekends for a combined headway of 6 minutes. Now I do not know whether the board was accurate, as I did not stay at the station to see the listed trains come. Well about an hour later or so I went to Eastern Pky-Brooklyn Museum to take a to Flatbush. So I hear a train leaving, I feel the air rushing, and I see people exiting the eastbound platform, so I know an eastbound train just left. I ask some people what train it was, and someone told me it was a . I looked at the board and saw that the next was due up in 12 minutes. So the (2)s were running at their scheduled headways. But the next was not due up for at least another 16 minutes (possibly more, and definitely not less)! What the strangeness!? The board also said that another to Flatbush was due up 6 minutes after the next . This was accurate, as I got off at Flatbush and waited around a bit, and sure enough I saw headlights in the tunnel a few minutes later. Train bunching. A while back, on a Sunday when the was running local in Manhattan south of Penn Station and the was terminating at Penn, I waited about 19 minutes at 96 St for a to Flatbush. Got off at Flatbush, waited around a bit, and just like this past Saturday, I saw headlights in the tunnel a few minutes later. Again, train bunching. My hunch is that this is happening for one of the following reasons: 1. A train is on time, it runs late one trip, and it is so late that trip that it ends up running late for its next trip (due to insufficient recovery time at a terminal). 2. MTA is running fewer trains than are supposed to be on the road according to schedules, because of financial problems, and they figure they will do it on lines that are more duplicitous like the and since it is far less obvious on those than on lines like the . The is erratic at times on the weekends like the . Not sure about . 3. The runs erratically so often because it is a long route (and well deserves its nickname of "the beast"). The length of the route should not cause it to run so erratically, but perhaps there is a lot of track work going on on the White Plains Road line that I do not know about because I am never over there, and this track work results in slow speed orders that result in all these delays on the . Of course it does not help that the line only operates every 12 minutes weekends and is the only service connecting damn near the *entire Bronx* to Harlem and the West Side. It really needs to operate every 8 minutes on weekends. Weird stuff. The need help! Especially the .
  5. But in the thread I created about the Nostrand/Utica transit lines, it was said that due to water table issues it would not be easy to run a subway south of the Junction. The Nostrand Avenue subway gradually rises as you go south from about Sterling Street or so because the water table also rises, and the subway could not conflict with the water table. Hence the fact that fare control is at platform level at stations south of Winthrop. The extension of the Nostrand line would have to be elevated over the street.
  6. Actually I was thinking they should send a train or two more down Nostrand than they currently do. Then, in order to prevent trains from bunching up on the Nostrand line, select (5)s should run express by just skipping stops down Nostrand following one of these two stopping patterns: Franklin-Sterling-Church-Flatbush (regular EXP) Franklin-Church-Flatbush (super EXP) Whether the train should go EXP or super EXP depends on how much time needs to be (re)gained so that the train in question can leave Flatbush on time on its next trip and also depends on whether a is directly behind. I think (2)s should still make all the local stops (unless, of course, a train is delayed and it has to run express to Flatbush to regain the lost time), in order to maintain consistency ((2)s run local on the main Brooklyn IRT line, so they should run local on the Nostrand branch, and (5)s run express on the main Brooklyn IRT line, so they should run express on the Nostrand branch). Also (2)s are less frequent than (5)s, so if a skips stops it is a much bigger deal. In order for this to be possible, no train can have more than four minutes built into the schedule to turn around. Some trains might get three in order to accommodate the slightly higher frequency. Ideally, it would be worked out so that some [or most] of the (5)s that currently serve Utica or New Lots get sent down Nostrand, and these additional trains go EXP or super EXP. It would work out because it would improve service at the stations that are generally the heaviest. I know Winthrop and Newkirk are heavier than Sterling, but I chose Sterling because I wanted the stops to be more evenly spaced. Select trains (again, I was thinking the (5)s only) would also skip stops heading north on Nostrand, following one of the two stopping patterns I posted above, depending on circumstances. This would be used as a mechanism to make up for any extra lost time and would be done so that if, perhaps, a and a are due at Rogers junction at the same time with the current setup in which the runs local on Nostrand, the would instead run express to gain time (even as little as a minute or two) and go through the junction before the . At the end of the day, the goal is to have the (2)s serve every station along Nostrand at headways no greater than 8 minutes during the rush, and to have the (5)s serve Flatbush and Church Aves at headways no greater than 6 minutes during the rush. Right now (2)s and (5)s are sometimes 8 minutes apart during AM rush hour and 11 minutes apart during PM rush hour, and this really should not happen. If this cannot be fixed by having trains make all stops on Nostrand, then at least some trains should go EXP so that all trains that go down Nostrand serve the busiest stations. The following AM rush schedule for trains arriving at and departing from Flatbush Avenue was what I had in mind. The PM rush hour schedule would be similar, perhaps the same. In the PM there definitely should be no fewer (5)s than are listed below. This is a one-hour period: -- arrives west at :36 > departs east at :36 + arrives east at :38 -- departs west at :40 = arrives west at :42 + departs east at :42 = departs west at :45 @ arrives east at :46 # arrives west at :47 @ departs east at :50 # departs west at :51 $ arrives east at :52 % arrives west at :53 $ departs east at :56 % departs west at :57 ^ arrives east at :58 & arrives west at :59 ^ departs east at :02 & departs west at :03 * arrives east at :04 "- arrives west at :05 * departs east at :08 "- departs west at :09 < arrives east at :10 < departs east at :13 ~ arrives west at :13 || arrives east at :15 ~ departs west at :17 || departs east at :19 /(2) arrives west at :19 _ arrives east at :21 /(2) departs west at :23 _ departs east at :24 ""(5) arrives west at :25 \ arrives east at :26 ""(5) departs east at :29 \ departs west at :30 `` arrives east at :31 ;; arrives west at :32 `` departs east at :35 ;; departs west at :36 } arrives east at :37 ] arrives west at :38 } departs east at :41 ] departs west at :42 arrives east at :43 Exactly 20 trains in, 20 out in a 60-minute period. East or west refers to the track used by the train in question. The symbols at the beginning of each line are there to denote trains. For example the train denoted by -- was the that arrived on the west track at :36 (minutes after the hour) and departed from that same track at :40 (minutes after the hour). Three trains have three minutes to turn around, the = train (:42 to :45), the < train (:10 to :13), and the _ train (:21 to :24). All others have more than three minutes. Would all of this work, assuming the (2)s were not restricted to the east track and the (5)s were not restricted to the west track? Also with the restriction gone, the route selector board at Newkirk would be obsolete. I came up with a way to eliminate this restriction while preventing crews from having to run around the station to get to their trains, so I know the restriction is not impossible to eliminate. I know it looks weird to have a train "arriving" on the east track one minute after a train "departed" from the west track, but I know they try to have all the (2)s come in on the east track and all the (5)s come in on the west track now, and the schedules online (google transit, MTA trip planner) say that some trains are scheduled to "arrive" one minute after a train "departs." And according to the schedules it seems like a train cannot be parked on a pocket track less than two minutes after a train has completely vacated that same pocket track. Of course if trains are running a little late and both pocket tracks are open by the time the next train arrives at Flatbush, that train just takes the east track and its follower takes the west track if it is directly behind. If it went down Nostrand, stopping at "L", Kings, "R", "U", "X", and Voorhies I would say 9 to 12 minutes. If it went down Flatbush, stopping at "J", Kings, Quentin, Fillmore, and KP, I would say 8 to 10. Another 2 to the Toys R Us, another 2 to Floyd Bennett.
  7. The Bx36 is far and away the worst bus route in the City of New York. Horrible accursed line from hell that embodies the troubled history of the [south] Bronx. Made me feel like I was in a third-world country. Makes me feel sorry for the decent, hard-working folk that must use it every day, live in the neighborhoods it serves, and deal with the violent, kicking, screaming, vitriol-spewing lowlives that ride it and live in those neighborhoods with said decent, hard-working folk. Most of the neighborhoods served by this line, as well as most neighborhoods in the Bronx need some serious help. I hate this line so much. The Bx2 is also pretty bad. Too many stops, very slow, access-a-ride on crack. Often picks up 2-3 wheelchairs/walkers at once at the Hub (149 St/3 Ave). The Bx10 and Bx20 generally go through nice neighborhoods, but are annoying due to their infrequency and unreliability. Bx7 too, but to a lesser extent. The Bx15 and Bx19 are pretty nasty too. Too many stops, very slow, lots of wheelchairs, and very rough neighborhoods. I think you can call these access-a-rides on crack as well. I could probably crack on a few (perhaps a bunch of) other bus routes, but I will chill.
  8. I meant "non-red" rather than "green." Forgot for a second that in several cases the signals will only be yellow or whatever. I am essentially trying to figure out how many trains per hour that small section of both the westbound and eastbound local tracks shared by the at Rogers JCT currently handle and have the ability to handle based on how quickly the switches can move and the lengths of the signal blocks before each section of track. I also wish to know the minimum interval between the time a train begins pulling out from a pocket track at Flatbush and the time you can have another train parked on that same pocket track (after the first one leaves of course). And the minimum interval between the time a train beings pulling out from the west track and the time you can have another train parked on the east track. Of course a simultaneous east track pull-out and west track pull-in is no issue since trains do not conflict in that case.
  9. 1. After a Manhattan-bound clears the local track at Rogers junction, how much time must pass before a at Nostrand Avenue can get the green signal to go through the junction? 2. After a clears the track, how much time must pass before the can get the green at President? 3. After a clears 142 Street junction on its way out of the Bronx, how much time must pass before a northbound can get the green at 135 Street [or the closest the can be to 142 Street junction while waiting for the to clear the tracks]? 4. After a train pulls out from, say, the west pocket track at Flatbush/Nostrand Aves, how much time must pass before an impending train can get the green signal to enter the west pocket track? 5. Assuming the east pocket track is clear and a train is pulling out from the west track, how much time must pass before the impending train can get the green signal to enter the east pocket track? It seems like it should be a little less since the Tw/Os do not have to wait for the train pulling out from the west track to clear the switches that the impending train needs in order to enter the east track. In that situation the switches needed to direct the impending train to the east track can be set before or while the departing train is on its way out; the impending train just has to wait for the departing train to clear the crossover in order to get the green signal.
  10. I actually did ride the BxM1 and 2. I rode them a lot more when I was younger, especially when they were under Liberty Lines Express. Last time I rode them was quite long ago though. At least 5 years. But over the 5 years following, I would look through the windows while seeing the buses go by on 230 Street (where it matters the most), and I saw a good number of empty seats each time. Whenever I rode them on the weekends I saw at least 10 empty seats every time. Alright, so ridership fluctuates over the years. I would just be surprised to see those buses with only five empty seats on the weekends these days. It irked me that the express bus service used to be adequate while the local bus service sucked and sucks more now. Artics are not the answer because MTA would have no reason to put them there and improve service frequencies. It would be an economic risk. If I were running the MTA I would not do it either. Not only would it not improve the wait time; it would also not improve the dwell times since more people waiting means more time spent waiting for them to get on when the bus shows up. Artics only belong on SBS and on certain local/limited bus routes. Yes, they use them to cut service, but some local/limited lines see increases in ridership even after Artics are introduced. The Bx9 is an example of this. The Bx10 is definitely not a place to put Artics. Again, for now. Bunching is a problem on nearly any local/limited bus route that picks up a good number of people and has lousy service. The solution is more service, not Artics. Also alterations to some bus routes, which have been discussed on the forums time and time again. One thing that was annoying about the Bx10 was its circuitousness. A lot of Bronx bus routes are like that because of the terrain. That is why so many more bus routes in Manhattan and Brooklyn are straight. Flat terrains in those boroughs. And B35, as you notice, the Bx10 is far more circuitous and goes through sparser areas than the Bx16 and Bx30. And of course my best friend the express bus competes with it. Easy to see why it is rather low on Riverdale's priority list. Not easy dealing with the circuitous and infrequent Bx10. What is the meaning of life?
  11. VG8: The answer is more service on the Bx10. No Artics (for now), no extra dispatchers, no extra babysitting by said dispatchers. And I think that if necessary, the express bus service can be reduced so that service on the Bx10 can be increased. It is just my belief that the express buses are a blatant example of frivolousness in a situation like this and I find it dumb to have expensive, traffic-ridden express buses running around with a good bit of room most of the time (except rush hours, I suppose, but I *always* saw empty seats on the things, even during rush hours) while locals, which are definitely cheaper to use, cheaper to operate, and probably have more potential to encourage ridership in this case, have to suffer so much. Feh, it is a 'whatever' situation if you ask me.
  12. What you said about the Bx10 being frequent is absolutely incorrect. That happened because the line suffers from bunching and they happened to bunch up when you saw them go by. Stand on a corner and observe the local buses going by for at least an hour and then you can talk to me. It only operates every 5-6 minutes during the AM rush hour, going from Bainbridge Ave to 263 Street. Half the buses terminate at Broadway when they come back from 263 after having completed a northbound trip. During the AM rush they only operate every 10 minutes from 263 to both Broadway and Bainbridge (those buses follow the full route, none of them terminate at Broadway). They are packed and people barely fit on them. Three express buses will pass you before a local shows up at those hours. I only witnessed it for about 20 years. Or 10 since they started severely cutting service rather recently. PM rush the only way they operate less than 10 minutes apart is if you are looking at the buses that get turned short at Broadway. Middays, evenings, and weekends they operate every 15 minutes or more. I am better off walking 20 minutes to the subway, up and down hills and staircases, than waiting if I see a local go by. And again, some people, especially the children, do not have the dough to pay for the express bus. And all that glitters is not gold, while some things that do not glitter are gold or have the potential to be gold. And the children are the future. And if you wanted to go south of 34 you could have used the IRT West Side and the Bx10. Only problem is, again, the Bx10 operates every 15 minutes during off-hours. The only way it would be good in my book is if it operated every 8 minutes off-hours (including weekends), 5-6 rush hours, BOTH rushes, BOTH directions. At the very least those should be the headways west of Broadway. Areas east of Broadway are good as far as transit goes, plus the Bx1/2 parallel the Bx10. What you told me about 34 Street just reinforces my point about the redundancy of express bus service, because the express buses are redundant as far as frequency goes, and some people actually want to go where the express buses do not go! That is where the subway comes in! Too bad the Bx10 has such poor service! If they reduced express bus service, perhaps they would have an easier time adding some to the Bx10 and actually making it a good line! It is easier to get most people to use local/limited buses and subways because they [usually] give you more bang for the buck! Most people do not have this aversion to 'cheap' transportation that you have. So the seniors seem to need the express bus. I do not particularly like the fact that you used that as justification, but I will go with it. They are people, they have needs just like we do. That is fine and good. If I am going to assume this is a solid contention, then my only response is that Riverdale is not for everybody and express buses are not for everybody. We can all agree to that. As far as Riverdale goes, I still think the express bus service is redundant, the local bus service is problematic, and once again, all that glitters is not gold. It ain't a commuter's neighborhood for the average commuter. I prefer neighborhoods that are. Peace.
  13. That is one of the objectives of SBS though, and that is one of the things that makes it superior to the old system. If the operator is at a red signal, s/he will normally open the doors, no problem. In systems where people pay before boarding, it makes sense to open the doors if the signal is solid red, will not change anytime soon, and the passenger is at one of the doors, ready to board (not at the machine!). The thing is, the whole dynamic is different with SBS because if you are driving a local/limited/express bus (though to a lesser extent with the express, since you do not work nearly as hard on the express as you do on the local/limited), the work can be mind-numbing and burdensome for numerous reasons. Other aspects of SBS, aside from the fact that its operation is more mechanical (requires less thinking, calculation, and guesswork) than that of a local/limited/express bus, eliminate much of the headache that comes with operating the bus. Yes, operating a bus is a repetitive job any way you cut it, but there is a difference between sitting at a stop for 5 minutes picking up people and then opening the doors again (even to pick up just one person!), and sitting at a stop for no more than about 25-30 seconds picking up people (and not having to hear the farebox or deal with each passenger individually and whatnot, not to mention the fact that half of them use the other doors anyway) and then opening the doors again to pick up however many people there are.
  14. What vanshnookenraggen said. The [current] Nostrand Avenue subway definitely operates south of the border between the terminal moraine and outwash plain sediment zones. That border looks pretty far north of the Junction to me. Also I thought that if you wanted to support a tunnel, you just had to make sure that the support beams in the tunnel were engineered so that they could support the road above. Especially for cut-and-cover, since you have to remove the soil to get in there and build the tunnel anyway. It seems no different from building support beams (fixed to the ground spaces between the tracks) of an open-cut so that you can build a road above, supported by the beams, for motor vehicles.
  15. 1929 plan, Utica line merging with Nostrand line via S: 1939 plan, Utica line to Floyd Bennett field: I wonder if the wider sections of Nostrand (Kings to Gerritsen and/or V to Emmons) had been widened specifically to fit extra tracks, since the rest of Nostrand is only wide enough to fit two adjacent tracks. Still wondering whether it is physically possible to have subways down there instead. Why did they want the Utica line to be elevated after J if the terrain along Nostrand and Utica is basically level from Empire Blvd to the edge of Brooklyn? If they were going to elevate it at J, they might as well have elevated it at Carroll where you have the steepest hill in Brooklyn. Where would the Nostrand line have been elevated and why, if again, Nostrand is level from Empire Blvd to its southern end at Emmons Avenue?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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