CenSin

6 hours ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

I would just do 72nd St and prolly116th St as express stops. One thing I dislike about the IND 6th and 8th Avenue line is the express stops are too frequent imo so the express trains sort of lose their benefit.

72 Street to 138 Street with no stops in between sounds nicer though. People will finally have a compelling reason to ditch the  even if all the stops below 72 Street are local.

2 hours ago, Kamen Rider said:

Ash as in the ashes left over from coal burning stoves that used to be in stations. hence why it's the garbage train. Why it's not another "Pick Up" I don't know. maybe someone just wanted to be different. 

That sounds like the aftermath of a dumpster fire. lol

https://xkcd.com/386/

2 hours ago, djtoro7 said:

I wish every T.O. would operate like that. I kid you not, one time I was running errands around the Columbus Circle area and took the Delta back home to Brooklyn. It was the most smoothest ride I ever had on a SMEE. I almost thought I was riding a CBTC line. Not a lot of T.O. know how to maneuver the R68/R68A fleet.

This human performance variability is probably the biggest reason for moving to CBTC from a passenger perspective. The average performance drags down what could have been a much faster system. With computers at the control, the variability is down to the environment and the equipment, and the system can operate safely with much tighter margins.

Would be easier to just tunnel under the existing tunnel since for the most part, there wouldn’t be any track or station connections north of 72 Street in Manhattan. That avoids the need to move utilities for tunnels to swap depths north of 72 Street.

“Ash” is the name of the letter “Æ.” I can’t imagine a two-letter bullet with “7Æ” in it though.

10 hours ago, Ale188 said:

I’m a grown adult and I can read and comprehend.

I would steer clear of using “I am an adult” when the accusation is “you are a kid/not grown up” because there’s a word for such people once you put the two together: man-child.

2 hours ago, Isaiah Billings said:

I'm not saying that longer train lines are less convenient, I'm just saying that they're not more convenient. Length and convenience are basically independent.

Perhaps a solid rubric by which you judge all lines fairly might prove your point?

With sea level rise seemingly an unabated problem now and for the foreseeable future, I headed over to NOAA to see what parts of the city might be underwater in the decades/century to come, and especially with respect to getting around by subway. I used the highest sea level rise projection: 10 feet.

• The Rockaways are f***ed. R.IP. all of the south of Howard Beach.
• The Tribeca neighborhood is going to be a part of the Hudson River. Barring some serious waterproofing of the tunnels, the 7 Avenue and 8 Avenue lines are getting bisected at Canal Street.
  • The 7 Avenue tunnel will be under sea level from Houston Street to the Financial District and Battery Park, so it may just be let go.
• While most of south Brooklyn (e.g., Coney Island, Sheepshead Bay, Gravesend, etc.) lines are elevated, they won’t have passengers to serve once the streets below are under the ocean.
  • The West End line will end at Bay Parkway, with tail tracks over the ocean if they don’t move the switches west of the station.
  • The Brighton line will end at Neck Road.
  • The Culver line will also end at Avenue U.
  • The Sea Beach line gets clipped all the way up to and including Bay Parkway, unless waterproofing and pumps are installed to hold the ocean south of Avenue U.
• Court Square will probably be gone. There will be no land left above ground on the side, which also means the will start at Queensboro Plaza on the Queens side of the Flushing line.
  • Where the Crosstown 21 Street station is situated will be a new island.
  • McCarren Park is underwater for the most part. For the Greenpoint Avenue station to be serviceable, the Crosstown tunnel would have to be made into an underwater tunnel from Nassau Street to Metropolitan Avenue. This waterproofing would also have to apply to the entire Metropolitan Avenue–Lorimer Street complex ().
• The Canarsie line is still elevated down to New Lots Avenue, although it will be over water south of Linden Boulevard. Needless to say, unless it’s either elevated or rerouted over another street or R.O.W., the line will lose access to its namesake neighborhood.
• The Upper East Side will see the loss of some existing stations and some that are on the verge of being built. Perhaps this might mean bisection of the Lexington and 2 Avenue lines.
  • 96 Street ()
  • 103 Street ()
  • 106 Street ()
  • 110 Street ()
  • 116 Street ()
• Lower Manhattan looks complicated, but the viability of most lines appear to end at Fulton Street, Cortlandt Street, or Chambers Street.
• That newly built Hudson Yards extension may or may not be viable. Above ground, many blocks south of 34 Street and west of 9 Avenue will be under water. With the subway tunnels themselves being buried so deep and its waterproofing known to be shoddy, it’s possible that Times Square–42 Street may once again be the new southern terminus of the —at least on the Manhattan side.
  • Barring some serious waterproofing of the tunnels, the may be bisected as two of the underground stations on the Queens side will be underwater.
• On the Bronx side:
  • The underground portion of the hews closest to water. The 3 Avenue–138 Street station’s exits will be right at the waterfront, meaning the underground station is a flood risk. Keeping the tunnel connection under the East River may or may not be viable.
  • Ditto for 138 Street–Grand Concourse ().
• Yards that will be gone:
  • 207 Street
  • Westchester
  • Corona
  • Jamaica
  • Canarsie
  • Coney Island
  • Rockaway Park

With the massive loss of yard capacity and facilities, the MTA may need to get creative with whatever remains like making use of elevated tracks that will be above water. (Whether storing and maintaining equipment in a saltwater environment is actually a good idea or not is not something I can comment on.)

On 6/29/2023 at 4:25 PM, Isaiah Billings said:

it also does make many stops between 59 st and 34 st that slows it down. This would be good enough for an A-

You ding points for a train that opens its doors to provide service? lol

But you give your home line a pass:

On 6/29/2023 at 4:25 PM, Isaiah Billings said:

The 1 is AWESOME. It's the train I take, and it is literally the perfect local. It stops not too much but frequently enough to get you where you need to go. It has a healthy speed of around 35-40 mph, and is VERY frequent and consistent. It also goes farther up to the Bronx, which the A doesn't. If you live in Upper Manhattan(which I do) and have a choice between 1 and A, take the 1!

If your mentality is that the glass is half empty, then you could say the pause on the bridge effectively added 3 local stops worth of commute time to the . It didn’t help people much going to Church Avenue (since the  is rarely fast enough to catch up that early) and the to Kings Highway is just up a minute or two ahead of the . On the rare occasion that the  pulled into Church Avenue with the , it’s usually because of a really crappy train operator and/or conductor on the .

On 6/29/2023 at 9:11 PM, Wallyhorse said:

You could likely for an SAS connection to 8th Avenue have such tracks coming off the SAS ramp up north of 125 after being under the existing tracks there and join the 8th Avenue line on the south end of such current tracks between the local and express tracks on each side.  

It looks like an inefficient cup handle-shaped route.

On 6/28/2023 at 2:35 PM, Wallyhorse said:

Any SAS line that connects to 8th Avenue would likely use the track between the local and express each way to/from just north of 135th whether using the Concourse Line or the 8th Avenue line.  This for example could be done where you have the  join the  on the Concourse line between 145 and Bedford Park Boulevard while the and both terminate at 168 and that would be the likely best way to do it (you could also with this if you want to a lot of de-interlining on Broadway itself before the runs on the SAS do it where with Phase 2 going all the way across 125 one of the or  going to BPB with the and the other going to 125th Street-Broadway while the , perhaps supplemented by a new "Yellow  "  I had proposed previously (running from 9th Avenue on the  via 4th Avenue local and the tunnel to Astoria) for my plan of moving the  to Nassau runs to Astoria (with if the has too many trains during peak hours because Whitehall can't turn all of them having some end and begin on the tunnel level of Canal Street, in this case with the continuing to run as it does now).   That to me can work. 

Have you traced the path on the map? What does it look like?

Since I haven’t looked at the phase 2 plans for a while, a recap and update was due. None of this will be news to those who already follow the development closely.

• The tail tracks will cross the Lenox Avenue branch. (Sauces: https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/2022-01/NY-New-York-Second-Avenue-Subway-Phase-2-Eng-Profile.pdf; https://www.cb11m.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/CB11-4.14.21-SAS-2-Update-final2.pdf)
  
  
• Placing platforms where 116 Street’s middle track would have been appears to be the current plan still.
• 
  
• 125 Street still had a middle track in old plans. A repeat of what happened to 72 Street is set in stone. (Sauce: https://new.mta.info/document/22416)
  

1 hour ago, mrsman said:

"Canal flip" basically routes the Broadway express to Montague tunnel and Broadway local to the Manhattan Bridge.  It is not a small project, but it has been looked at as a way to provide express service from SAS to the Broadway express to Lower Manhattan.

For a much lower cost and increased flexibility, would it not be much cheaper to just install switches north of 57 Street–7 Avenue? A lot less excavation (if any) and the SAS-Broadway connection is no longer locked to a particular pair of tracks.

4 hours ago, darkstar8983 said:

There is enough storage space and CI can handle two types of equipment (it has done so  and  continues to do so to this day).

Off-topic, but assuming this is the case and reamains the case once SAS gets far enough along, perhaps the ’s trains could be based out of Coney Island Yard. For morning rush, s end at 125 Street and continue in service as s. For evening rush, s head back to Coney Island as s.

1 hour ago, trainfan22 said:

Recording such announcements would be an waste.

Acknowledging them would also backfire. The recordings would make them infamous; then girls start throwing their panties at them/the train.

On 5/10/2023 at 11:44 AM, Wallyhorse said:

I suspect we would eventually need BOTH an SAS AND rebuilt 3rd Avenue EL to handle the additional traffic in Manhattan, especially with congestion pricing coming in.

On 6/4/2023 at 3:10 AM, Wallyhorse said:

If the Myrtle EL were rebuilt, it would likely be done in many areas as two levels of single track and platforms on both levels (to account for wider trains as opposed to the old line) with a few areas to allow for crossovers in case single tracking was needed in some areas and so forth.

Which pols would enable any of this to happen?

2 hours ago, Kamen Rider said:

* for the record I have hated being touched from behind for most of my life.

* for most of life

Not reacting favorably to being surprise-touched from behind has been the product of a half billion years of evolution.

42 minutes ago, zacster said:

They were file system limitations that were built into the OS that supported it, regardless of the medium.  "Like most Windows file systems, FAT16 supports a variety of cluster sizes, allowing it to be used on hard disks that are as small as 16 MB or as large as 2 GB. A later revision to the file system allowed it to support volumes up to 4 GB.  The earliest SD card products were routinely formatted with the FAT16 file system due to its support across Windows, Mac, Linux and OS/2 operating systems."

FAT32 allowed bigger drives, so they made them. 

The root cause is not the file system either. You could technically put any file system you want on the card (e.g., ext2).

The limit comes from the card-specific data (CSD) structure, which an SD card (using the original standard) uses to report its capacity. There are actually enough bits in the structure to support up to 4 GB, but whether it’s accessible relies on the hardware (i.e., the card reader) supporting it. The OS/FS doesn’t mean a damn thing unless the card’s bytes can be addressed.

You would be correct if this were about SDHC versus SDXC. The key difference between the two is the file system—FAT32 versus exFAT, the latter which enables capacities higher than 32 GB. (But it should be noted that FAT32 can technically go up to 16 TB with larger cluster sizes.)

42 minutes ago, zacster said:

Let's just agree to disagree, this isn't important.  It's ancient history.

I disagree with that. Ancient history is very important in the industries which typically rely on ancient technology. I can’t comment on which technologies the MTA’s equipment runs on, but it sure isn’t cutting edge.

This whole exercise was to make the points that:

1. Legacy technology and backwards compatibility holds back innovation.
2. Just because something could be done in the consumer space doesn’t make it an appropriate solution for industrial/enterprise use.

36 minutes ago, zacster said:

But you are still not understanding that the 32 bit word is the limitation.  Everything after that needed special programming to make it work in a 32 bit OS.  I'm not saying that's not possible, it certainly was done,  just that 2gb is not a random limitation.  We had a system that could go to 4gb by turning a switch.  It used the sign bit, but the program recognized that.  The entire system went through an upgrade to 64 bit OS and problem solved. 

You’re missing the forest for the trees here. The original SecureDigital card limitations weren’t OS-level limitations. They were baked into the standard which had to be revised to allow for a bump in maximum capacity. Perhaps the 2 GB limit and 32-bit addressing coincide, but if that were the case, how do you explain the 32 GB limitation of SDHC? Or the 2 TB limitation of SDXC? Or the 128 TB limitation of SDUC? Are SDHC cards using 35-bit microcontrollers?

Not having an officially sanctioned bathroom break doesn’t stop all train crew members from taking one anyway. I was on a train where the T/O stopped in the middle of the tunnel to take a piss out the storm door. The sigh of relief was audible through the cab door. C/O covered for him by making the usual announcement when trains stop in between stations: we have a red signal ahead of us. lol

14 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

clear out the homeless from being in the system at all times

But this is exactly what I wrote in the beginning: you’re simply shifting them elsewhere. People don’t spend all their time on the subway. Once they get out, that’s where all the homeless people will be—the same ones that the MTA cleared out. You don’t solve the problem by deferring it.

1 hour ago, zacster said:

You have that wrong.  2GB is the maximum address space of a 32 bit number.  +/- 2^31.

I’m intimately familiar with the limitations as I have been using SecureDigital cards since the initial 128 MB capacity. The 4 GB SDHC cards required a new card reader because the larger capacity was not backwards compatible with older readers. Same with SDXC when that came out. And so far, no SecureDigital card on the market exceeds 1.5 TB (of which Micron is the sole manufacturer).

When I say the “original SD standard,” I mean to the exclusion of SDHC (SecureDigital High Capacity), SDXC (SecureDigital Extended Capacity), and SDUC (SecureDigital Ultra Capacity). The limits of each type are listed below (c.f., https://www.sdcard.org/consumers/about-sd-memory-card-choices/sd-sdhc-sdxc-and-sduc-card-capacity-choices/):

• SD: 2 GB
• SDHC: 32 GB
• SDXC: 2 TB
• SDUC: 128 TB

This is without the additional complication introduced by physical card sizes, supported protocols, bus speeds, minimum bandwidth, or minimum IOps.

Believable. I used to cut classes too just because I felt like it. 😏