Eric B

I wonder why they keep switching them around. It's like "musical trainyards"  now!

17 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

Perhaps my memory is foggy (I haven't been to Forest Park in a LONG time), my apologies. 

Taking a look at Google Maps, you are correct the apartment building is on the side of the ROW, I don't know why I thought it was directly in front (probably confusing it for the apartment building in front of the NYWB leads at 180th St).

The baseball field however does look like it takes up both trackways to the front, as well as the spur to the adjacent LIRR tracks.

From the (J), it does look like it might be over part of the ROW, likely due to the angle of view, but it's hard to tell.

I don't remember them. Where is that posted?

On 7/4/2021 at 5:06 PM, R32 3838 said:

the will not lose any r160's. The point of the R211 8 car units is to expand and add service to the , r160A-1's 8313-8376 is for the only with them seeing some service on the like the R143's.

Are there going to be 8 car 211's? I figured they might want to try the open gangway on the (L), but did not hear any definite plan. (Though I'm sure they might remove a car from the test units, to test them over there like they did with the 160A's). This is assuming the 211T is approved after the initial tests.

Seeing this nice flush ended car (and with the fancy color changing digital signs) evokes the innovation of the R44 and 46, which were banned from the Eastern div. because of the car length. But if they only order five car units, and don't get any 211T's for the (L), then this could be the 44/46 all over again, with the East forever shut out (unless they ran a five car shuttle somewhere, but they probably won't bother with that). They could get 4 car 211A's to expand service, but wouldn't it be more likely for them to put five car 211 sets on the  (as part of making it full length), and just sending the 179's to ENY for the expansion? That looks like the more likely scenario.

It wasn't in the building (that's the still open one on the west side); it was where the newstand is on the southest corner, and you can see the newer sidewalk cement under it.

Inside, it has orange tiles and a low ceiling where the token booth was.

Yes, it was reconfigured to the present in the 90's

Also, while this wasn't built for SAS; there were often ideas of using it as a cheaper alternative to the new line continuing below Delancey.

17 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

I'm guessing they also cut power at 7th Avenue-53rd.

They could have had the and continue to 42nd and end there. 

That's where they would actually turn, since the switches are between 34th and 42nd. Not sure why they would have to discharge at 34th.

6 hours ago, 1train2255railfan said:

https://new.mta.info/press-release/mta-announces-plans-increase-number-of-electric-buses-purchased-2021?fbclid=IwAR1iABFE2dXmrP7q9SkgR9GUdil2U9_2RE-mW0661z-pgPHgLzuW1YViRaM

 

Cool; since we hadn't been hearing as much about the all-electric delivery forecast lately. (Was looking like they were just sticking with hybrid).

Since it was just two trains peak direction, I'm surprised they're even bothering with it; I thought the service reduction would be the end of it. I guess they must have been doing really welll with riders.

How does the emd at 7th Ave?

On 3/29/2021 at 2:45 AM, R32 3838 said:

 

I doubt they'll use 8 car R179's during this GO. It's going up concourse which has very heavy ridership meaning 100% full length trains. It'll likely be a mixure of R46's that the uses now and R68/R68A's from the lines. Maybe they'll slip two or more full length R179's from the (Hardly doubt it because it'll confuse line crews).

It will have to be the 68's added, because the is being extended, and the cut way back, so only that line will have the extra cars for the service, which is on their own line anway.

So this will be interesting!

They usually just run the  to 34th, so are they doing work on 6th Ave. those weekends?

Some 160's were retrofitted with LED headlights, and they are the standard "cool white" (prob. 5000K)

I saw one passing by Linden/Ave D. by the  yesterday. Had never even heard of the route.

9 hours ago, R10 2952 said:

The whole Queens redesign draft was/is an unmitigated disaster.  The plans they released for southwest Queens (Ridgewood, Glendale, Maspeth, Middle Village) look like they were drawn up by someone who has never ridden a bus nor even set physical foot in that area.

I mean really, a route blending the Q38, Q39, and Q67; and a route connecting Roosevelt Island with Middle Village... Whose ass are they pulling these ideas out of?

This area is horrbly connected. (I call it the "cipher zone"). It's the current system that looks like it was drawn up by someone who has never set foot in the area. The redesign, while of course not perfect, would still be an improvement.

Look at the new big LED sign by the cafe in the Moynihan station, The pixels are now small enough that they could pretty much approximate that sign!

The R39 would be for both Myrtle and 3rd Ave. and thus A Div. sized (since even the B Div. el used A Div. side cars. don't know what they would have done from Central to Metropolitan where it would run with the wider M line cars).

IT would basically be an A Div. version of the R38. If I remember correctly, someone not too long ago somewhere uncovered a diagram of it, or something, though I'm not sure now.

12 hours ago, RTOMan said:

ATO wont be used for some time im told..

The CBTC limit area is only from Kew Gardens to Roosevelt ave all four tracks.

There are certain "kinks" that need to be worked out..

Only 6 trains on the F line have CBTC enabled the Dispt will inform the Crew.

If a TO isn't qualified the train stays in Bypass.

The thing that Kicks rocks is the work zones..

Instead of it clearing once the front of the train clears the resume it clears when the back of the train does..

I went through three of em from Roosevelt to Kew gardens on my last half.. Felt like my hand was gonna fall off lol..

That's nothing; these days on Canarsei, some "glitch" they say is causing the work zones around Livonia to stretch for two or three stations! And this has been going on for weeks now! They should just turn the CBTC off for that whole stretch and go WSP; except that there is a gap in the signals around New Lots (especially southbound) for some reason (but otherwise, they're spaced normally, for all the unequipped trains going to the wash, or storage such as the R32 there). But in the midday, having such along "absolute block" under WSP would be better than what they're doing now.

ATP basically corresponds to what they used to call "cab signaling", where your r/y/g is on a screen, in a round dial, with your speed shown via the actual dial, and you have to try to keep it in the green. It's actually more work than WSP (the conventional signal system), because you have to pay attention to this screen in addition to the roadway. When I'm seeing is that the policy is to just turn the ATO off regularly on the outdoor portions of the line (which on the (7) is almost the entire line!) due to the work gangs, and those tend to be the hardest areas for manual operation, because of the grades and curves, with sudden speed limit drops.

(Another term I had never heard until qualifying is "Movement Authority Limit", which is basically what was known as the "moving block" —as opposed to the old "fixed block", for the area ahead that CBTC control has been granted to each train approaching. That's when you see the signals start to flash green.

You didn't even mention BIE's, where we have to do the whole walkaround wherever it is. The conductor is only responsible for making announcements. 

I heard on the railroads, the engineer is the one who sits it out, and the conductors do everything. I wonder if that is supposedly holding true to the 'rule' of the conductor being in charge (though there's more than one conductor, but I'll guess one of them is over the others), and the subway changed the practice? Or perhaps that rule didn't apply to the railroads, and the engineer is the one “in charge”, and “in charge” is in the sense of a supevisory position rather that who has the most physical responsibilities?

I myself always wondered why the lower paid man is said to be in charge, and as stated, we're responsible if we know a conductor is doing something wrong as well; but it seem they were only thinking about the conductor being able to immediately pull the cord for [obvious] improper operation, where we have less awarenes of what they're doing.

23 hours ago, R10 2952 said:

Always wondered that myself; I get the impression it was something they planned but gave up on halfway through (probably when the shells were already constructed).

Because of how they ultimately changed it, the half-width cabs never made sense to me.  In fact, I've never even seen photos or footage of R68/As operated from the half-width cab.

I saw them used (by T/O, but conductors couldn;t use them, of course) in the beginning, and you could sit on the end of that transverse and look out the front! I don't know why they didn't just remove the cabs when they were made permanently into 4 car sets. 

I saw a sign on one (on the Q) where the plastic was discolored, like it was starting to be burned. Never saw that before! Hope they get the 211's soon.

That probably was the R55. It was proposed a few years before the R68's came out, and if you think about it, the 44/46 and 68 bodies are pretty much the same; the same 75foot layout with the orange seats. Main difference was the cab one each end of every car (one ful width; one small), the wall panels went from faux wood and the beige to stainless steel; the front end door was again recessed, and a single ridge was added on the side in the middle of the strip between the two sets of three ridges.

So the 55's may have just been a continuation of the 44/46, as in the early 80's the faux wood color scheme was still new and in vogue, but they had given up on the P-wire and went back to the SMEE system. A few years later, as the battle against grafitti had gone into full effect, they went with the stainless steel interior (starting with the 62's on the IRT), and by that time, the contract number was up to 68. (this is probably also when they changed the car configuration and added the small cab and changed the end doors. They had essentially reverted back to the the R42, but 75feet, one cab full width, and stainless steel.
What I'm interested in was the proposal to have the full width cab collapsible, like how the 62 cabs are convertible that way. The door pretty much closes the operator side into a small cab, but I don't know how they would have folded down the other side with the curved walls).

It's running on the midnights, where it's not revenue now.  It's on the express tracks from Roosevelt to Kew Gardens, and the local tracks from Continental to Kew Gardens (I guess so the could still have it past Continental).

(Just finished qualification today!)

Just started qualification today. (Also, didn't know it was actually running on QBL, on the midnights, so E and F and even some M TO's, are qualifying already!)