RailRunRob

3 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

I also talked about the Hudson being a factor.

Oh do continue id love to hear that hypothesis as well. 

5 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

There's nothing to think "highly" about windy, snowy, hilly conditions. I've been in all three areas, and I don't find the conditions identical at all.  Each has their "thing" if you will.  For example, I've always found Wakefield to be much colder for some reason. 

I'm sure the folks in Highbridge, Kingsbridge, Univerity Heights, Inwood, Washington Heights, Harlem and Northern Staten Island don't like the windy, snowy and hilly conditions as well. It's a given the conditions aren't all the same ,buildings trees and wind chills are block for block literally. I'm was just speaking to the Elevation and Riverdale not having that much more height than Woodlawn and Wakefieldld and the ability for more snow due to height.  Highly came to mind as I heard the word irrelevant figured you were waving the standard affluence Riverdale badge. If that wasn't the case my mistake.

4 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Yeah but they are not next to Riverdale, so it's irrelevant.  When I travel to those neighborhoods, I don't find the weather to be exactly the same, just as it isn't the same when I'm in Sheepshead Bay and other parts of Brooklyn.  

🤦‍♂️ Hey if you say so! But I am happy you're finding solace my old stomping grounds. Does my heart good you think so highly of it.

13 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

That's like saying that hurricane Sandy, which had a devastating impact on Riverdale had the same impact on Wakefield and Woodlawn (which simply wasn't the case).  Different neighborhoods, different areas. In addition to the elevation, there's Van Cortlandt Park which is the third largest park in NYC, so Woodlawn and Wakefield aren't as close as they may look on the map.

You do understand there's a difference im speaking in the context of elevation relating to the temperature range and thus snow.  What does any of this mean? Is there a standard for devastation? What are you referring to? Flood, winds,down trees, power grid?  I'm talking elevation, Not storm track, just Riverdale is not at a high enough elevation to get more snow then other neighborhoods in the Borough nothing more or less I know you like to pivot.  And last time I checked Wakefield and Woodlawn are 10 min walk apart they share a Metro-North Station! I've walked the  to Woodlawn MN station a few times.

On 3/8/2018 at 3:15 PM, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Riverdale gets more snow than the Fordhams or the Harlems because we are elevated AND right long the Hudson,

Wha? Don't you think that's a bit of a hyperbole? Riverdale is just a few feet over a Wakefield or Woodlawn even in my neck of the woods were over 100 feet in elevation. When we get to 1000 feet plus we can start that convo. 

On 3/9/2018 at 12:23 PM, GojiMet86 said:

https://m.railjournal.com/index.php/north-america/vivarail-d-train-to-be-tested-in-us-cities.html

 

 

Saw a BMU version of this unit as well. Could be great for something like the RX.

10 hours ago, itmaybeokay said:

I'm not entirely certain how the feed is updated by the train. Presumably, it's BLE sensors near/in the stations networked by TCP/IP. 

 

Here's a Diagram breakdown with ISIM/ITRAC integration with the upcoming CTBC check the data point's (Purple) this would be what's feeding their public feed. Interesting. I'm thinking about building out a quick app as a hobby. Was thinking about putting together something that can track the movement of riders in route. Think R211 mock route map with location might be a bit taxing on the ole battery (Location Services) but might be cool to try.. Test my UX/UI chops out in transport.   I Have a few documents on the ISIM software infrastructure If anyone's interested.

50 minutes ago, officiallyliam said:

Because they know that no community will ever agree to cut and cover; the MTA has ruined their reputation when it comes to community impact from capital projects after 63rd Street and, most recently, SAS. People won't forget that even with deep bore tunneling, SAS phase 1 still managed to be a decade-long pain for the East Side. If the MTA had a better record with meeting budgets and timelines, and really minimizing the impacts of their construction work, doing cut and cover in a more widespread fashion would likely be on the table. They're still proposing it as one of the (and, in my opinion, the best) options for the Grand Street SAS stop to allow a cross-platform transfer to the . In order to stay out of the way of potentially oppositional communities the MTA will choose cut-and-cover, for better or for worse, for future projects.

I'm not a Certified or practicing Engineer. But I do have a background and degree in Civil and Environmental. The fact that Phase 1 took a decade I mean that's operation with the MTACC has nothing to do with the science behind Geotechnical engineering. Cities like London, Paris,LA and Madrid are all using boring methods with better yield. Sure the Mica and Schist might have its challenges nothing not seen before. As stated by @trainmaster5 the environment is really what sets the parameters. Great way to sum it up.. From Geology to Existing obstacles, and Environmental Challenges you have to find the best way to make it work with least impact. So coming from Engineers prospective the MTA's shortfalls aren't my concerns science, math and execution are. Don't get more wrong C&C is a reliable, effective and proven method. Just not with many of the conditions found in parts of Manhattan. Brooklyn, The Bronx different story altogether.

1 hour ago, Trainmaster5 said:

That's why cut and cover won't be an option going forward,  Massive utility relocation and shoring up the existing buildings would never be an option put forward by a reputable construction company or consortium. The relative depth of the newer stations has more to do with the existing surroundings than anything else IMO.  The "ornateness "  of them is something else entirely.  Carry on. 

My point exactly.

1 hour ago, officiallyliam said:

You mentioned the Sixth Avenue line. Yes, that was an engineering marvel that probably won’t be repeated again. But if we could build a subway around PATH tracks and an elevated in 1940, we can do a two-track line down Water Street today

Two things with Sixth. The H&M only went as far 33rd street Sixth Ave south of that point is lower density.Midtown besides the El was clear. And IIRC the IND grazed and extended Sixth Ave itself to Canal they muscled through there. So the mile or so where the Local rides outside of the HM was lower density and wide enough to accommodate an extra two tracks they were able to shore up properties abit easier. Lucky they had the foresight to add provisions for the express tracks that bore deep to clear everything above including the 14th street BMT. 34th street station with its over the Penn and under the BMT was a triumph.  

1 hour ago, officiallyliam said:

Utility relocation isn’t the end of the world, and they could probably be replaced inside the newly-built subway tunnel.

Ahh man, your Underestimating the process. I guess my question if C&C is the best way to build why aren't they taking that option? Places like the MurryHill and The East Village might work. Second Avenue is also very close to the shoreline In Midtown you have quite a few crossing you'd have to clear as well. 

17 minutes ago, RR503 said:

Also keep in mind that Manhattan had significantly more people at higher densities in the early 1900s than it does today. In that sense, we have an easier time today. 

Keep in mind too that back then, there was little knowledge whatsoever of what utilities were where, complicating construction greatly. It was the age of “dig until you hit something, reroute, rinse repeat.” Sure, Parsons was a savant at surveying underground things and then remembering the info collected, but he was only able to do that for so many places. 

☝️ this.

17 minutes ago, RR503 said:

That said, unless you’re really digging to the sidewalk line or burrowing under foundations, height is pretty inconsequential. 

True. Stations along major thoroughfares are definitely the pitch points.

1 hour ago, officiallyliam said:

As for the Jamaica Van Wyck skylights thing, I was simply saying that the MTA should incorporate more natural light into future station designs, not necessarily that Van Wyck’s example is directly able to copied to other stations.

Understood.

1 hour ago, officiallyliam said:

Nobody said these things have to take seven to ten years. If anything, cut and cover would speed up the process by removing the complexities associated with working several stories under the ground. And we should be working to speed up capital construction across the board; there’s no reason we have to except the status quo as inevitable.

1

Okay,here's your path south how do you make sure these buildings are shored up? Digging at the basement or sub-basement level? What about there Water, power and Sewage how long would you say it'll take for Utility relocation? Sure you don't want to just dig under in bedrock?

1 hour ago, officiallyliam said:

The unfortunate reality is that future SAS phases, Utica, Nostrand, Third Avenue - subway extensions we all think should be built - just aren’t possible if everything is built like SAS phase 1 and Hudson Yards. Cut and cover is a proven alternative that works well in New York’s road layout. Why aren’t we using it, considering the TBM and deep station method simply isn’t sustainable?

Brooklyn and The Bronx I'm not counting. I don't think you're looking at the holistic picture IMO at least. Hudson's Yard do you understand the logic behind why it's so deep? How could you build using C & C when your clearing 3 levels of rail traffic above plus the foundations to Skyscrapers with 7 or more floors plus Pylons below ground?  Same with Second Ave Especially in East Midtown what am I missing? Your talking about lines that were built mostly before 1940. And the Sixth Ave line barely made it.. That was an engineering marvel unto itself that's window is done. It's to the order of magnitude more Obstacles underground Power, Steam, Fiber , foundations other tunnels.. plus disruptions.. What am I missing?

1 minute ago, officiallyliam said:

The MTA got scared off from cut and cover after the PR disaster that ensued when they cut the Broadway - 63rd Street line through Central Park. The combination of an angry affluent public and the advancement of TBM technology made the MTA just give up entirely on cut and cover. 

Provided you have wide, straight roads (as we do in NYC) cut and cover is far and away the best subway construction method. But bringing in back now is politically infeasible.

You think Cut and Cover even feasible at this level of density in Manhattan. The Golden age of cut cover was 1900-40 tho dense is nowhere near the obstacles of today would cause so much disruption to a City that needs to keep moving 7/24/365. The last time this was tried was 40-45 years ago. I don't think it's an option in Manhattan at this point bar maybe lower density East Harlem.

You really think this could fly for 7-10 years?  Bearly made it with the muck stations on SAS this go around.🚇

15 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

And also not so damn deep... The whole line should have been at the same depth as 96th Street which was built with cut and cover...

86th isn't to much of grade difference from 96th the elevation jumps up 50 feet in that 10 block stretch so that adds to it plus the bedrock layer and geology changes. 72nd on the other hand.. Would anything but deep level work with the number of highrises and foundations to worry about?  I heard someone talk about Jamaica-Van Wyck the skyline and vents at that station or on the Service road. How would you make that work within the density of the UES?

34 minutes ago, itmaybeokay said:

I'm reasonably certain the full-color LCD clocks integrate the CPU into the case of the display and the only required connections are network and power. The clocks are actually running a full-screen kiosked Chrome browser (I've seen them error out) - so they're loading a web page to display the countdown information. 

Cable Length would be an issue. HDMI needs a repeater every 100 feet tops - 50 feet ideally. The repeaters can get pricey. And also require power. So easier just to hang a cpu in the display cabinet. 

Make's sense!

34 minutes ago, itmaybeokay said:

The point is, the full-color LCD countdown clocks are ultimately fed by a web server which creates an HTML page from GTFS data. The same server could also serve the data as JSON strings - or whatever -  that one could parse with a raspberry pi and bitbang onto a LED matrix.  The hardware I suggest is a dodgy implementation - but my point is - from the JSON you could translate it into whatever data format the extant and new LED matrix displays savor the flavor of. 

This also makes sense so.. with General feed is the countdown the countdown based on the Train Activity Console and updated with via triggers when the train enters the station? Or are the stations along the line talking to each other via TCP/IP with the BLE tied in on the station level? And tracking that way..  That brings me to wondering to how reroute information is handled?  I know we're going deep in CPM territory interesting topic.

20 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

The B division clocks don't have the announcements like a A division ones. So no next train information or service announcements. They clearly have the feature because they have played the see something, say something psa

The question what's the process and the system to add information and updates? You'd have to have to have some type of teletype to go with the Audio. It's clearly a different system then whats on the A division.  I'm sure the PSA is a default maybe even a tester. I'm not sure why they wouldn't be able to put in at least weekend service changes B division wise. There are some places tho at 145th street you do get next train information audio and visual.  Approach information Upper and Lower Level and amount of stations away. Barclays as well. So they can auto trigger alerts. ATS has to be the entry point for information on the A division side. Don't see any other reasons.

8 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said:

Are the B div clocks silent? If so, I don't understand why as it is an ADA violation and the clocks are half as effective if they only are visual and not audiovisual.

Which Clocks? LCD's or dot? Silent as far as messages?

1 hour ago, WestFarms36 said:

To put it on more simple words... Now that we got the new Bluetooth Countdown Clocks on the B Division, instead of MTA adding 1 or 2 more on the platforms, why are they wasting money adding the old A Division styled countdown clocks on those same stations that just are giving date and time?

The Bluetooth system is a stop gap. Being there not doing ISIM-B (ATS-B) the clocks could still be useful when CTBC start's coming online. The systems are incompatible the color displays would need to be switched over to the new system in segments. Queensborough Plaza would probably be a good place to see this. I would love to see if they could feed &   countdown information on one display with two systems. Being the old count down clocks are well saturated in stations you might be able to feed the beacon information into them and just convert the data feeds. The new displays are LCD they would need a the very least an HDMI connection not sure if the cable length is an issue or if you'd just have a CPU in different sections of the stations feeding the displays. Maybe the reason there only in certain spots and not all over the station. May just be easier to add the old ones for now the ducts and everything needed is in place already. As long the data is there most people will be good.

26 minutes ago, Jemorie said:

You sure are something, aren't you lol. Apparently you didn't even read my post carefully. You're acting like all this time I didn't know that but I'm already old enough to realize that. But "thanks" anyways I guess lol.

You need to learn how to read before saying things.

Relax bud not talking down to you just adding to the flavor. I saw what you wrote just adding to your point. Maybe I shouldn't have replied directly figured I would add my two cents. No ones attacking don't over think it.. A lot can be misinterpreted though posts as opposed to a conversation.

11 minutes ago, Jchambers2120 said:

Definitely! Some tough calls will have to be made soon if we really expect to make any improvements and with that people won't  be happy. The needs of many outweigh the needs of the few

New York's prosperity depends on it. They're going to have to get creative and the interim with patterns and optimizing. A little +4% here and +10% here adds up... Have to gain that yardage and move upfield.. One small victory at a time.. The only way to devour the elephant one bite at a time.

34 minutes ago, Jemorie said:

I was not arguing for any one-seat express ride. Besides, the  still has its seats filled up and a few people standing each car leaving Utica northbound. I don’t see why the  has to go to and from New Lots in terms of an operation standpoint anyway. In general, passengers and railfans can’t always get what they want, the subway doesn’t exist just for them.

3

Express service in the overall scheme of things doesn't necessarily equal faster in NYC. It equal's bandwidth more than anything I think riders are starting to understand that. From Utica what are you saving 4-5 mins via the Express? I notice at Franklin all the time if people see an Express train they'll jump ship if not they'll keep moving on the local. I'd say the psyche of the rider is really gear around movement and the feeling of some type of progress.. They'll take local service as long as it's moving.  Express services only net gains on the extreme ends a Brooklyn Bridge to 125th  vs   whats that 7 mins?  Last week I caught a  at 145th the  didn't overtake us until Franklin. As long as that train is moving riders will get with the program.

2 hours ago, CenSin said:

And if we look south, the Washington DC Metro is struggling to balance service on its lines after the opening of the Silver Line. Planners have been dreaming up all sorts of ways to detangle the mess they ended up with.

Man didn't they have a while? Plan's Dulles Service has been on the table for a while now at least since the 90's.

31 minutes ago, Jchambers2120 said:

Again, my question is when do we draw the line between satisfying customer preference and balancing out the needs of service for everyone? 

Were at that precipice now IMO.. The system is operating well above what it was designed for.  The current battle is maximizing essential infrastructure. Customer preference is becoming more and more of a luxury. 

4 hours ago, Fan Railer said:

Without field shunts cut in, the R32s only do ~45 mph on level track. The R46s and 68s are slightly faster; they'll do between 47 and 50 mph on the flats.

When did they start cutting field shunts? I wasn't a EE major but I remember learning that when you shunt a DC motor you cut the overall torque. Good on level track bad for climbing inclines no?