Jump to content

SUBWAY - Random Thoughts Topic


Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, Storm said:

Ok, so:

1. The shuttle would run from 96th-57th/7th. The reason why I am mentioning this is because sometimes the (Q) runs in two sections and SAS service runs every 20 mins.

2. This shuttle is only going to run on weekends.

Also, why does the (N) sometimes run up 2nd ave? Is it for additional service? Or is it because of a switch problem? Fill me in.

If it is for additional service, then that is proving my idea about a shuttle.

 

There's a stark difference between a temporary change for work with a clear idea of when it should stop and a permanent change that kneecaps any level of effectiveness, particularly when service is otherwise through-run at one terminus and said terminus lacks any equipment-related facilities.

The (N) trains running to/from 96th Street could be viewed as additional service, but for Second Avenue, this is more happenstance than deliberate. Prior to Second Avenue opening to the public, those trains would end at 57th Street, just like the (Q) used to. By stark contrast, the lone (R) to 96th Street is deliberate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 30.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 hours ago, Storm said:

Ok, so:

1. The shuttle would run from 96th-57th/7th. The reason why I am mentioning this is because sometimes the (Q) runs in two sections and SAS service runs every 20 mins.

2. This shuttle is only going to run on weekends.

Also, why does the (N) sometimes run up 2nd ave? Is it for additional service? Or is it because of a switch problem? Fill me in.

If it is for additional service, then that is proving my idea about a shuttle.

 

The (Q) runs every 20 on 2 Av when they need to do single tracking. A shuttle will not help there, for obvious reasons. 

There are some rush hour (N) trips to/from 96 to provide additional service to the corridor + to slightly reduce the load on 60 St and Astoria. It's a common rerouting terminal as well (for everything, really), so it may be you saw an incident diversion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Calvin said:

 

In simplicity, some (N) runs via Second Av during the rush hour b.c Astoria terminal cannot handle all the (N) and (W) trains during the peak. So, some trains run over Second Av avoiding heavy traffic on Astoria. 

Similar to how some (5) trains run to/from Utica Av between 6:56AM-8:43 AM and 3:30-6:10 PM that Flatbush terminal cannot handle all the (2) and (5) trains all at once. 

Those (5) trips to/from Utica all depend on the traffic conditions of both Nostrand & New Lots.

Even though there's a scheduled outbound trip from New Lots, most of the time during the AM rush because the (4) gets delayed from Lexington Av, some of those Utica Av (5) trains will instead run to New Lots Av and get stored at New Lots until the PM rush or turn back around to go to Dyre Av.

Now in terms of the PM rush, and @Trainmaster5 correct me if im wrong, the (5) can be all over the place. Especially if Lexington Av is ridiculously overcrowded. Most of those scheduled (5) trips end up doing something completely different then what they're suppose to. A (5) thats suppose to come out of Flatbush can instead originate out of New Lots or Utica, a (5) thats suppose to operate to Dyre can get sent to Neried and then end at Gun Hill Road, a (5) thats suppose to come out of Bowling Green ends up running via 7th Av. 

Now the main point of this post (sorry for going off track lol), is the fact that despite on public schedules those trips are listed as (N) trains, on countdown clocks and trains they are shown as (Q) via Sea Beach. This bring me to the point that (MTA) has no organizational skills when it comes to scheduling. I understand that they don't want riders getting confused along Broadway, but either sign those trains up the correct way or fix the scheduling to be accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

Those (5) trips to/from Utica all depend on the traffic conditions of both Nostrand & New Lots.

Even though there's a scheduled outbound trip from New Lots, most of the time during the AM rush because the (4) gets delayed from Lexington Av, some of those Utica Av (5) trains will instead run to New Lots Av and get stored at New Lots until the PM rush or turn back around to go to Dyre Av.

Now in terms of the PM rush, and @Trainmaster5 correct me if im wrong, the (5) can be all over the place. Especially if Lexington Av is ridiculously overcrowded. Most of those scheduled (5) trips end up doing something completely different then what they're suppose to. A (5) thats suppose to come out of Flatbush can instead originate out of New Lots or Utica, a (5) thats suppose to operate to Dyre can get sent to Neried and then end at Gun Hill Road, a (5) thats suppose to come out of Bowling Green ends up running via 7th Av. 

Now the main point of this post (sorry for going off track lol), is the fact that despite on public schedules those trips are listed as (N) trains, on countdown clocks and trains they are shown as (Q) via Sea Beach. This bring me to the point that (MTA) has no organizational skills when it comes to scheduling. I understand that they don't want riders getting confused along Broadway, but either sign those trains up the correct way or fix the scheduling to be accurate.

I think you're overestimating the degree to which the (5) is a flexible operation. It just has a really complicated schedule! Here's a string chart of scheduled southbound 5 service in the AM and PM rushes. Utica, Bowling Green and Flatbush all get trains, and there's not much of a pattern to it (or rather, the pattern is difficult to see without looking at (2)(3)(4) schedules simultaneously).

tms3vP2.png

PS6dBDC.png

Changing a train's terminal can be done, but is avoided wherever possible. Remember, most of transit service management is crew management rather than equipment management. A train is a train and can basically run wherever you want whenever you want it, but moving crews around a lot can rapidly lead to service issues as the fabric of the timetable comes apart and you end up with intervals on the stand with no available crew to take the train out, crews missing lunches, crews deadheading everywhere, or the like. There are ways to deal with these things, but there's a reason we have timetables and work programs, and it's not to generate performance metrics. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Vulturious said:

You're forgetting that the (Q) has to deal with the (B) and (N). The (B) between Prospect Park and Dekalb Av because they both run on the same tracks, the (N) from Dekalb Av to 34 St-Herald Square. The (N) switches local north of that station and every other time such as late nights and weekends, it switches local north of Canal St. The (Q) dealing with both those lines ends up decreasing service frequency along the line entirely which leads to the (N) being send up along SAS.

Because the (N) is interfering with the (Q) and not being enough of it, it ends up getting rerouted, plus it's not the only line that gets rerouted. You have the (R) and (W) as well because 3 lines running along 60 St tunnel and the whole switch issue at Queensboro and other issues I can't think off the top of my head.

Having SAS run as a shuttle wouldn't exactly make it better because then you'd still have the (Q) trying to terminate at 57 St-7 Av with the shuttle as well. That would mean less (Q) trains to terminate. You would still have the (N) to deal with because it's switching local between 34 St-Herald Square and Times Square-42 St.

Ok, good points. But this is only if they'd make a new tunnel for this (S). If they don't, then well, trains will run less frequently and the riders won't be happy..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Storm said:

Ok, good points. But this is only if they'd make a new tunnel for this (S). If they don't, then well, trains will run less frequently and the riders won't be happy..

They won't be happy if the service is permanently cut to a shuttle that requires a transfer to get anywhere when they could simply through-run the service, especially with the single-tracking being a temporary thing. As soon as you do that, you'd be better off not running it at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Storm said:

Ok, good points. But this is only if they'd make a new tunnel for this (S). If they don't, then well, trains will run less frequently and the riders won't be happy..

Even if you had a different tunnel, you still would just have a short (Q) train with no difference between ending at 57 and 96 St.  Might as well just run it through 63 St. I don't see the reason why anyways. It doesn't improve service on SAS or Broadway.

Edited by Theli11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/7/2021 at 7:59 PM, RR503 said:

Not necessarily. You could have run the plan they have now ((E) to Delancey, (F) to Brooklyn via Cranberry) with the swap taking place at West 4 rather than at 36 St. Two issues, though: 

- A W4 swap would have created a relatively complex junction operation there. On 8th local, you'd have (F)s, (E)s and (C)s all trading places. At 5tph apiece, it's certainly possible to schedule this to work, but weekend junction ops need to be basically bulletproof given the generally variable operating environment + NYCT's reluctance to trust operators to punch correctly when operating GO routes. This latter problem is, in fact, one which disadvantages this service plan above and beyond the potential for delay: GOs which require diverges northbound at W4 generally are staffed with a 'spotter' whose job it is to confirm train identities to Tw/Os who then issue routes. 

- 8th Avenue CBTC is already creating a number of GOs, which would further complicate the W4 operation. On weekends where (A)s are local, you'd be dealing with an additional 6tph through the merge at W4. On weekends when the local is out of service, you'd have to compose some alternate service plan, as neither A3 nor A4 track has direct access to 6th Avenue at W4. So to make the service plan more resilient to GOs, it's better to swap at 36.

Fair enough about why they swap the (E) and (F) at 36th. But at the very least, they should put up maps at (E) and (F) stations - and on the website - to show where the trains are going on while the tunnel is being worked on. All the web page shows is a map of where the Rutgers St Tunnel is. It gives a description of how the (E) and (F) are being rerouted, but a map would show it much clearer than a written-out description. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've noticed that people who take the subway rarely care about what model subway they're riding on...

though the only thing what riders care about is getting from point A to point B.

Also, I did see a Siemens on the (Q) a few days back...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Storm said:

I've noticed that people who take the subway rarely care about what model subway they're riding on...

though the only thing what riders care about is getting from point A to point B.

Also, I did see a Siemens on the (Q) a few days back...

Probably turned into an (R) train later on in the day. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Storm said:

I've noticed that people who take the subway rarely care about what model subway they're riding on...

though the only thing what riders care about is getting from point A to point B.

Eh, I'd say the latter is priority #1, but they also rant about the models here and there... Most people I know prefer NTTs, or as they call them, "those new trains with LEDs."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

Eh, I'd say the latter is priority #1, but they also rant about the models here and there... Most people I know prefer NTTs, or as they call them, "those new trains with LEDs."

Well Brighton, Astoria, and Brighton riders with hit the hardest by this. Alot of people are not happy about the R46s on the (N)(Q)(W) , and they aren't even railfanners. I think one time, Brighton's residents complained about the R46 on the (Q)<Q> in 2001. If I'm not mistaken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, R68ACTrain said:

Well Brighton, Astoria, and Brighton riders with hit the hardest by this. Alot of people are not happy about the R46s on the (N)(Q)(W) , and they aren't even railfanners. I think one time, Brighton's residents complained about the R46 on the (Q)<Q> in 2001. If I'm not mistaken.

All we can do is cross our fingers and hope the (MTA) exercises. If not, then the (Q) will be seeing a lot more unhappy riders.

4 minutes ago, R68ACTrain said:

Brighton, Astoria, and Brighton

Typo, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Storm said:

All we can do is cross our fingers and hope the (MTA) exercises. If not, then the (Q) will be seeing a lot more unhappy riders.

Typo, right?

This is why I'm saying in the R211 thread, if MTA does exercise, have the R211s go to Jamaica, Pitkin, and (32 4-cars) for ENY, have the displaced R160s go to Coney Island, so they can get their R160s back. At the end of the day, R211s are going there anyway, so R160 s have a possibility of getting displaced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, R68ACTrain said:

Yes, I meant Brighton, Sea Beach, and Astoria

Right. Coney Island's R46's keep breaking down, and one time one of them even got derailed.

Also, remember when C.I gave 20 160's to Pitkin to help out? why did those R160's go to Jamaica after the (A) got its 179's back?

One last question: You guys have been talking about the TSS... what is it?

Edited by Storm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Storm said:

Right. Coney Island's R46's keep breaking down, and one time one of them even got derailed.

Also, remember when C.I gave 20 160's to Pitkin to help out? why did those R160's go to Jamaica after the (A) got its 179's back?

Exactly, because Jamaica is so greedy. You can equip the trains with CBTC, and send em right back to Coney Island.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Storm said:

Right. Coney Island's R46's keep breaking down, and one time one of them even got derailed.

Also, remember when C.I gave 20 160's to Pitkin to help out? why did those R160's go to Jamaica after the (A) got its 179's back?

One last question: You guys have been talking about the TSS... what is it?

remind me what TSS is again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, R68ACTrain said:

Exactly, because Jamaica is so greedy. You can equip the trains with CBTC, and send em right back to Coney Island.

lmao

 

Jamaica Wasn't being greedy, CBTC requires a higher spare factor. if the (C) and (F) service reductions stay then Jamaica could lose some R160's (Probably all the siemens) to CI with the 98/9900's going back to jamaica.

 

as of right now Jamaica needs all of their r160's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/7/2021 at 9:11 AM, R32 3838 said:

The R42's replaced the remaining R33WF cars that were used in the B division. As well as more R32's were added to the work fleet to push out the R127/134's to the IRT to bump out their Redbirds. The Only Redbirds that are still going to be in work service is the R33WF's that are used for the Dyre ave Rail adhesion Train and probably the signal dolly cars.

Probably the right move, to be honest.  NYCT never really did much in the way of maintenance of the R33WF after they were relegated to work service.  Some of those cars, it's a miracle they didn't disintegrate into a cloud of rust on their own accord.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, trainfan22 said:

TSS = Train Service Supervisor 

It's crazy how the TSS can be so mad over improper signage. The term "VIA" just makes the route more confusing.

Here are a few examples

(Q) via Sea Beach should be a (N).

(E) via 6th ave should be a (F).

My case rests.

Edited by Storm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Storm said:

It's crazy how the TSS can be so mad over improper signage. The term "VIA" just makes the route more confusing.

Here are a few examples

(Q) via Sea Beach should be a (N).

(E) via 6th ave should be a (F).

My case rests.

I wonder if it has something to do with record-keeping or union issues, i.e. if a crew is being paid to operate a specific line/train, even with significant reroutes, they are supposed to keep it signed up that way so the on-time data, etc gets recorded a certain way, and the crew gets paid for operating the line they are signed up for. I could be totally off-base, but you are totally right that it is really confusing to customers, which makes me think there is some other reason for it   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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