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

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by '89 Liberty MCI

  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?
  16. Aside from the financial and political reasons as to why an extension of the Nostrand Avenue subway is unlikely, what physical features of the Nostrand Avenue area from Flatbush Avenue to Voorhies Avenue would hamper subway construction? Water table issues, Bay Ridge LIRR ROW? Specifically, where exactly are the water table issues? And how far above or below the level of the Nostrand Avenue subway trackage is the Bay Ridge LIRR trackage? Would it be necessary, appropriate, and/or possible to construct a flat junction if the Nostrand Avenue subway were extended? Was a flat junction part of the original plan, or did the IRT engineers and planners want to elevate the Nostrand Avenue subway above the LIRR ROW (but not above the ground) or drop it below the LIRR ROW? Which of the three options (elevation, flat junction, or drop) would make the most sense today? And is Voorhies Avenue as far south as the bumping blocks could be placed? Where exactly is the furthest south the bumping blocks could be placed? Where is the furthest south a subway entrance could be placed? I would want there to be an entrance at Shore Parkway Access Road South if possible. I think there would be room for a staircase if that northbound turnoff lane on Nostrand Avenue were closed off to vehicular traffic, though I do not know about the clearance issues underground (sewage system etc). I am referring to the lane for vehicles making a right from Nostrand onto Shore Parkway South. Again I know about the politics involved, but let us try to ignore that aspect for a second. Just to confirm, was the Utica Avenue line supposed to be elevated south of Carroll Street? It was once said that this is the reason why Utica is wider south of Carroll than north of Carroll. Would it be possible to keep it underground on Utica and Flatbush (south of S) all the way to Floyd Bennett Field, which was the proposed southern terminus?
  17. I hope I did not derail the thread. What I have to say is fairly relevant to the OP. I think/hope. The problem is that the cheap transportation (and RRs, even though they are expensive, but the catch is that they actually give you bang for the buck since they actually move ass, unlike express buses) is generally needed a lot more than the exclusive and inefficient (where the two adjectives are NOT mutually exclusive) transportation. There are too many disparities in neighborhoods like Riverdale where local bus service totally sucks and express bus service is redundant. Yes, it is redundant. I observed this while living there for 20 years. People in Riverdale might beg to differ, but those who beg to differ are plainly and simply not looking at the big picture and are being myopic. Not trying to offend them, just making an observation. Also I should add that *certain* areas, especially and mostly in Staten Island, actually should have express buses rather than SBS/LRT. It varies from situation to situation. But I think most people in most neighborhoods would much rather have a local/limited/SBS (in order from least preferred to most preferred) than an express bus. More expensive to use AND gets stuck in lots of traffic, compromising the security of its existence and ridership? Spare me please.
  18. Service on the Bx10 was reduced two years ago and the Bx20 barely operates these days and is a useless waste of diesel that shows up right behind Bx7s and Bx10s half the time and is empty half the time. Service sucks on both lines. To each his own, but all that glitters is not gold. And you are comparing apples to oranges in some ways.
  19. http://www.nyctransitforums.com/forums/531730-post3.html As INDman said in that post, the system will only be set up to keep a green light green, not to change a signal from red to green. At an intersection like the Junction it probably makes more sense to just let the lights do what they normally do. Flatbush gets a slightly longer signal than Nostrand, and Flatbush is more congested than Nostrand at the intersection. Especially southbound. Flatbush is a nightmare southbound at the Junction. Now if a B44 SBS pulls up at the northbound stop while Nostrand has a green signal and keeps the signal green until it has finished dropping off and picking up, the congestion on Flatbush Avenue becomes so much worse than it is now whenever Flatbush has a red signal. Since a northbound B44 SBS bus would probably spend about 25 seconds at most dropping off and picking up at the Junction, it would not make sense for Flatbush traffic to wait for the bus to finish picking up for up to 25-30 seconds. 25 extra seconds of green for Nostrand (and red for Flatbush, plus the one- to three-second delay between the time the Nostrand light becomes red and the Flatbush light becomes green) would be the worst case scenario, which would happen if the B44 SBS bus pulled in to the stop at the time that the Nostrand light was supposed to begin changing to yellow (and then red). That is way too much time for the Flatbush traffic to keep on piling up before Flatbush gets the green again. This would only work if they banned parking and standing on Flatbush from Farragut to H during the busy hours. Also Nostrand is supposed to get a northbound, curbside, peak-hour bus lane from I to Flatbush and a southbound, curbside, peak-hour bus lane from Farragut to H. I timed the intervals at the Junction before, I believe it is 30 seconds of green for Nostrand, then 60 seconds of green for Flatbush, then about 15 seconds for the all-walk phase (when no vehicles can enter the intersection), then green for Nostrand and repeat. I am not sure whether it varies by time of day and day of week. They may also program the TSP so that the signals behave differently for different situations. If the bus gets there and Nostrand is supposed to turn red about 15 seconds later, the lights will probably just do what they do now and the bus will have to wait. Or, maybe the bus picks everybody up within those 15 seconds and then it makes it into the intersection as the light changes. This is alright since the buses will be making the left onto Flatbush rather than going straight. So the bus should have a clear shot since the last of the southbound traffic on Nostrand is going through the intersection as it is trying to make the left. DOT said it wants to ban northbound left turns at the Junction for all vehicles except MTA buses. Additionally they may put a left turn traffic signal at the Junction, so even if the Nostrand signal becomes red, the northbound B44 SBS bus can still go through. This will be much easier since it will be the only vehicle that can legally make that turn. So it does not have to wait for other vehicles to go. Unless the leader is right up front or a NIS MTA bus (especially a B44 local that terminated at the Junction and wants to turn around via Flatbush/Glenwood/Nostrand to head back south) wants to make that turn. In the case of Utica/Eastern, Eastern Parkway currently has priority over any north-south street. I know the reds on Rogers and Nostrand at EP last about 60 seconds. I do not know how long they last at Utica. Also there may be more signals for turns at Utica/EP than at Rogers/EP or Nostrand/EP. And Linden Blvd will likely not be changed. The intersecting north-south avenues will still have red signals that last about 75 seconds (this is the duration for Rogers and Nostrand at Rogers/Linden and Nostrand/Linden) because Linden is a heavily used street and has priority. Same deal with Atlantic, although I forgot the duration of the reds on Bedford and Nostrand at Bedford/Atlantic and Nostrand/Atlantic. I know nothing about Utica/Atlantic. I cannot speak for Utica, but the thing with Rogers/Nostrand is that even though there are longer red signals than those on 1st Avenue, there is less congestion. Rogers and Nostrand move much better than 1st. During the rush, 1st is pretty slow. Very congested thanks to the fact that too many bridges and tunnels feed in to 1st. If a M15 SBS can make 14 stops along 1st Avenue over a distance of 6.1 miles in 43 minutes during the rush, then a B44 SBS (which has practically zero turns) should have no problem making 16 stops over 9.3 miles in 48 minutes during the rush. It is not easy for me to estimate how long a B46 SBS would take since I do not know Utica extremely well and since Utica cannot have signal synchronization (this is different from TSP) like unidirectional streets. It is easier to estimate the travel times for SBS routes that travel [in bus lanes] on one-way streets or travel on two-way streets that are not badly congested but make few stops to pick up/drop off on the two-way street(s) in question. I would estimate about 4 minutes from the time you leave one stop to the time you leave the next stop for the average pair of B46 SBS stops. Maybe 5 from Empire to EP. 3 from Fillmore to N. Just to give you an idea. It would probably take 4 to get from H to D, from D to Church, or from Church to Empire. 3 from KP to Fillmore. 3 from N to Flatlands, 3 from Flatlands to H. So 29 from KP to EP during rush hour. Unfortunately this is not much of an improvement compared to the 31-34 minutes it currently takes during rush hour (on paper). More consistent/predictable/reliable than the local/limited because of the POP system and (hopefully) bus lanes on Utica, but still. This illustrates my point about how SBS only produces real results if it is on unidirectional streets or makes few stops on bidirectional streets with decent traffic flow or whatever other conditions must hold to make it effective. If there are well-enforced bus lanes and good, effective (read: not willy-nilly) TSP on Utica, then those 29 minutes could be cut down to 23. It should really be 23 minutes at most in my opinion. And that is being rather generous (allowing a little extra) if you ask me.
  20. I think it would take 25 to pick up 60 people. Next time I ride the Bx12 or M15 SBS (or if I ride B44 SBS after it starts) during rush hour I will see exactly how long it takes. With SBS you typically do not need more than 25 to pick up/drop off people at a stop. 15 is the max if you are picking up about 30-40 people. Although as time goes on the dwell times decrease because people get used to the system and move more quickly. These times do not include the time you spend sitting at red signals after you finish picking up though. The maximum dwell time at a stop for the B44 SBS will probably be 90 at Nostrand/Flatbush northbound, including the time spent waiting for the signal to change. I do not know the lights along the B46 as well as I know those along the B44. Longest dwell time would probably occur at Eastern Pkwy northbound on the B46 SBS, and I would guess about 90 seconds there. Pick-up/drop-off wait time and red signal wait time included.
  21. You want a stop 4 little blocks after Union Avenue? Even if they had no B46 local service up there I still could not see why the two stops should be right on top of each other when there is a train upstairs. On the southern ends of the B44 (mentioning it because you said you thought they might can the B44 local south of U) and B46, there are fewer transportation options and higher ridership than on the northern ends. The fact that there are fewer transportation options means it is more difficult to get around down there. Also there are more senior citizens down there in the quieter/less busy areas. So it makes less sense to end all local service to the southern terminals than to end all local service to the northern terminals. Not to say it absolutely will not happen, but you know. They will probably just extend the B46 local to Kings Plaza at all times including AM rush hours so that the B46 SBS can sustain motion down Utica for a decent period of time. It needs to, since it only covers 4+ miles before it gets to a subway. Grand Concourse: Mysterious2train was referring to the limiteds, which currently make local stops north of Flushing.
  22. Will they even be able to send the thing north of Eastern Pkwy? The streets seem too narrow for SBS. I certainly do not support SBS on streets that are bidirectional with one lane in both directions. Yeah, I know, the B44 and future B44 SBS does/will do it on Nostrand between Farragut and Kings Hwy and between Gerritsen and V. However the logistics are different since the B44 SBS will only stop three times on these stretches, at Flatbush, Kings Hwy, and U. If the B46 SBS does operate north of Eastern, so be it. It will just be slower than the B44. I was under the impression that the B46 SBS would only operate south of Eastern. The B2 and B31 will only get Artics if their routes get extended so they can pick up more people to justify higher service levels. I do not think Marcy Avenue should be a stop, Acela. It is right next to the terminal. I know the are right there, but it should only be a stop if the buses tend to get caught at the light or something. Would like to hear your reasoning since you know the B46 like the back of your hand. Might not be a bad idea to skip N for various reasons, including its proximity to Fillmore. It seems like Winthrop should be kept because of Kingsbrook. The B44 basically has the same stopping pattern (Church, Clarkson, Empire). Although maybe you want to kill the Utica-Winthrop stop because Utica does not move as well as Nostrand and Rogers (two-way vs. one-way pair) and because there are no bus transfers there. But to me it seems like Winthrop should be kept. I think Eastern and St. John's should be consolidated as a compromise. Kill both stops and instead put one at Lincoln Place/Eastern Pkwy. Union Avenue/Heyward Street should be a stop instead of Lorimer Street so that people can transfer to/from the right there. Based on past arguments on this forum, it seems unclear whether SBS increases fare evasion, decreases it, or has little to no effect. I personally think this should be completely ignored when choosing routes to convert to SBS. My mentality is, the more routes you convert to SBS, the better. Most bus operators will say that the working conditions on SBS are much better than those on non-SBS routes, and as an occasional (formerly frequent) bus passenger I can tell you that the less I have to use non-SBS routes, the better. After years of seeing and hearing about all the nonsense that B/Os, including the ones I know, have to deal with, SBS is a Godsend. Even though it is not as fast as we would all like it to be on the Bx12, M15, and M34. But for argument's sake, as far as the fare goes, I seriously doubt MTA is losing more money than it would if there were no SBS. Between the people that do not want to risk getting fined, the people that take the risk and [eventually] do get fined, and the lower operating costs of SBS due to the decreased running times, SBS is probably a cost-neutral operation at worst in the long run.
  23. I put questions in bold so they would stick out in this long post. TwoTimer: Based on what you told me before however, it sounds like rebuilding Rogers junction would not really improve anything since the are so frequent. I remember (4)s getting held at 149 Street southbound quite a bit, yet 141 Street junction handles fewer trains than Rogers junction and is not nearly as 'sloppy'. Flatbush is definitely easier and cheaper to fix than Rogers junction and probably needs fixing more than Rogers junction does, since it is the major limiting factor for Nostrand Avenue capacity. For the following questions, suppose both pocket tracks are occupied. 1. After a train begins to pull out from the west track at Flatbush, how much time must pass before a train can begin to pull out from the east track? 2. What is the minimum wait time for the train on the west track if the train on the east track pulls out first? 3. Does Flatbush normally have the train on the east track leave first since that train can leave more quickly? 4. If you put a 20mph double interlocking in the tunnel, do you have enough room to put another 20mph double interlocking north of this double interlocking? 5. Can a <20mph double interlocking be placed north of the 20mph double interlocking if we cannot have two 20mph double interlockings? What is the fastest combination of these double interlockings that can physically be placed in that tunnel? 6. Would having two double interlockings between Newkirk and Flatbush increase capacity on Nostrand, even if the terminal remains stub-ended? Why or why not? If it would increase capacity, then for now I would like to see two double interlockings between Newkirk and Flatbush. If the east track is open (or about to be open because a train is passing) between the new, northernmost double interlocking and Flatbush and no train is sitting on the east track in Flatbush, get over to the east track via the new/north interlocking so you get out of the way of the train that needs to depart from the west track. If you move the Avenue H exit down 100 feet it will have to be on the south side of H rather than the north side. The distance from the exit to the intersection of Nostrand & H is 92 feet on google maps. Also I had been thinking about the tail tracks, but the problem is that the people entering through the east entrances by the northbound B41 bus stop, the southbound B41 stop, and the northbound B44 stop would have a longer walk to the west platform since the platform bridge would be further south. It might take longer to make transfers. People entering by HSBC would have a longer walk to the east platform, but fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on how you wish to look at it) not that many people enter there anyway. Especially compared to the east entrances. However the wait time would fall because the terminal could then handle more TPH. The more TPH this terminal can handle, perhaps the less slack has to be picked up by the other two terminals. It would be less convenient for passengers to get to the trains, but the wait time would decrease. I actually even thought about having only the south eight cars platform so the two north cars are already out the station when it is time to go, but that would be a disaster because the people would barely fit on the trains, both leaving Flatbush and heading to Flatbush (a mass exodus currently takes place whenever a train pulls in as Flatbush is a heavily-used station). It would probably cause a lot of other problems too. It would not be conducive to ridership growth. On paper and based on my observations when riding the and observing these trains along the Brooklyn IRT and observing the trains entering and departing Flatbush, Flatbush gets good service, but from time to time you will have anomalies: Two consecutive (5)s or two consecutive (2)s to Flatbush end up arriving there 11 minutes apart during PM rush hour when the should be operating every 5-6 minutes and the should be operating every 7-8 minutes. On the bright side, trains usually end up arriving at Flatbush 11 minutes apart most likely because the second train gets slowed down near and after Rogers junction but arrived at most of the stations in Manhattan 5-6 or 7-8 minutes behind its Flatbush-bound leader. Some trains are scheduled to go to Utica or New Lots because Flatbush can only turn so many trains around. What I want to see is more consistent and more frequent service to Flatbush. My goal is to get it to the point where no (5)s have to go to Utica/New Lots unless they need to access Livonia yard. Bronx people seem to have a problem during the PM rush, because when a or enters Flatbush 11 minutes after its leader, and there is no or coming from New Lots/Utica to squeeze in between, then Bronx people might have to wait as long as 15 minutes to get a train to 241, Nereid, or Dyre. Happened to me before when I wanted to get from E. 180 to Gun Hill/WPR a couple of years ago. It took a good minute for a to show up after about 3-4 Dyre (5)s came through. I think it was longer than 10 minutes. Roughly 1 out of every 5 pairs of consecutive (5)s might get stretched out to 10-11 minutes to Flatbush (and consequently 10-11 mins back to the Bronx) when you have as many Lexington trains going to Utica as you currently do (my friend who lives by the said as many as 5 Utica trains in a row will show up in the PM rush before a to Flatbush shows up). Also I am curious as to what exactly defines a "stub-end" terminal and why the trains have to pull into Flatbush at 5mph. I try googling "stub-end terminal" but cannot find any clear definitions or answers. If Flatbush is considered stub-ended because it has two side platforms and the bridge wraps around the track ends, well, that does not seem much different from VCP and Woodlawn, which are only different because they have an island platform. They have side platforms for crews and I think the platform bridges wrap around the track ends at those terminals too. I even saw the South Ferry terminal designated as a stub-end terminal on one site. 7. Can I get a clear definition of this "stub-end" terminal please? I can only guess that trains have to pull into Flatbush at 5mph rather than 10mph like VCP/Woodlawn because there is less room between the bumping block and the actual end of the rails, so there is less time and room for the bumping block to stop the train in case the brakes fail. 8. TwoTimer, what did you mean by leaving on the post? NX Express: If Flatbush could take on more TPH, some (5)s that go to New Lots and Utica could go to Flatbush instead, and Flatbush could do a better job pushing the trains out so they can make better service to the Bronx. As a result, more trains can go to Flatbush, for the people traveling from Manhattan to the Nostrand Avenue corridor. Then Utica and New Lots do not have to do as much work during PMs to pick up the slack for Flatbush. No trains are added to the ; some (hopefully most) (5)s just change terminals. I know Flatbush trains go through Rogers junction slower than Utica/New Lots trains, but would diverting some (hopefully most) trains from Utica/New Lots to Flatbush really have such an adverse effect on the Brooklyn IRT and Rogers junction?
  24. I only speculated; I do not know. Since service is so frequent they probably fudge that a bit. Maybe four whole minutes from the time the train starts pulling in to the terminal so that you end up with 3.5 minutes from the time the T/O hits the parking brake to the time the new T/O gets a line-up to take that train out. I was under the impression that there had to be a certain minimum amount of recovery time for the train to make up for small delays that could have happened on the previous trip. But I know if it gets really bad they will just have the train skip stops on the way to the terminal so that it can be on time for the next trip. Also in the case of the at least there is more room at 241 and Dyre, so the trains can pull out of those terminals on time for the following trip back to the southern terminal, even if they left Flatbush a bit late. Unless they are returning to the yard. Quite entertaining when the automated announcement at Flatbush says that the next Manhattan-bound train will depart in one minute when that train has not entered the station yet (and takes about 30 seconds to get from the north end of the platform to the bumping block). Even better when I see the starting lights on and the board is blinking to Eastchester-Dyre Av 0min (for example) while the train is still pulling in to the station. Or when two trains need to leave right away and the board blinks Wakefield-241 St 0min and Nereid Av 0min simultaneously and mind you, there are trains waiting to enter Flatbush. >_< I do not want to digress too much because I still would like answers to my questions, unless I already have all the answers, but I wonder if the dispatchers at Flatbush could announce which track the next train is leaving from. I know the boards tell you one train will leave from track 3 at this time, the other train from track 2 at this other time, but at terminals the boards are usually off until a train pulls in, and at Flatbush this is even more prevalent since it handles two high-frequency lines and you have to know which platform to go to get the next train out if you are in a hurry. The announcements and boards should also refer to the tracks as the east and west tracks, rather than or as well as referring to them as tracks 3 and 2. My main reason for these provisions is that they might help distribute passengers, so that they do not have to crowd the south end of the station to get easy access to either platform or the south cars of the trains. If they know the next train will leave from the west track they can go to different locations along the west platform so there is even distribution of passengers in that next train. Same goes for the east platform.
  25. How early do crew members have to line up at their positions (front of train for T/O, middle of train for C/R) before they are supposed to get the line-up/starting lights so they can start the next trip? For example if you have to take a out of Flatbush Avenue at 8:07 and get your line-up/starting lights at that time 8:07, I would guess that crews technically have to be at their positions at 8:04 (3 minutes prior) so that they have enough time to reprogram the train (on NTTs) and recharge the brakes. Is this a hard-and-fast policy that all crews have to adhere to? Or just a guideline? I know they only have the full 3 minutes if their train pulls into the terminal on time. If the train is late and pulls in while the starting lights are on, which often happens at Flatbush, there is only enough time to recharge the brakes and do whatever else must absolutely be done before pulling out since the TOD moves slowly, preventing the announcements and signs from being reprogrammed quickly enough. All cars currently in service need to have the brakes recharged before starting a new trip out of a terminal, correct? And what other things must absolutely be done before leaving the terminal regardless of the schedule? I only know that the following must absolutely be done even if the train is late, assuming it is going into service at the terminal (not running light to another station further down the line or to the yard): -Train comes in -T/O #1 changes headlights to taillights and applies parking brake -C/R #1 dezones doors and then opens them from the other cab -T/O #2 and C/R #2 come in and close cab doors -T/O #2 recharges brakes and changes taillights to headlights -C/R #2 presses door warning button ("stand clear of the closing doors please") and closes doors -T/O #2 pulls train out of terminal Just want to know if anything is missing. Even trivial details if there are any, so if I missed even the smallest thing please state what I missed. Also, is 4 minutes the minimum amount of time allotted for a train to turn around? According to schedules this is all that most Flatbush trains get during middays and rush hours.

  • Create New...

Important Information

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