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.

SUBWAY - Random Thoughts Topic


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 26.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

4 hours ago, XcelsiorBoii4888 said:

(L) train sliding down tracks while serving the Bedford Ave station. Was this recent and has what caused this to happen? Has it ever happened before? 

https://www.instagram.com/p/CSrbxXgAKTv/?utm_medium=share_sheet

Multiple issues here.

ATO is having a problem and letting the brakes get released when they're suppose to be locked.

Door safety lock isn't recognizing that the doors are open, or else the brakes would be applied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, R32 3838 said:

 

 

That's because the lines were intended to go further out east with the (J) going as far as Hollis and the (E) as far as Springfield Blvd or Rosedale

That doesn't explain the lack of flexibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How did the idea came about? Why was it build? Was the 6th Avenue line always meant to go there? Why wasn’t Grand Street build to be converted to island platforms for 2nd Avenue? Wasn’t the 6th Avenue and 8th Avenue line supposed sent to Williamburg? Was the 2nd Avenue line supposed to be sent on the Manhattan Bridge?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Amiri the subway guy said:

How did the idea came about? Why was it build? Was the 6th Avenue line always meant to go there? Why wasn’t Grand Street build to be converted to island platforms for 2nd Avenue? Wasn’t the 6th Avenue and 8th Avenue line supposed sent to Williamburg? Was the 2nd Avenue line supposed to be sent on the Manhattan Bridge?

Just a question about the Chrystie Street connection 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Amiri the subway guy said:

How did the idea came about? Why was it build? Was the 6th Avenue line always meant to go there? Why wasn’t Grand Street build to be converted to island platforms for 2nd Avenue? Wasn’t the 6th Avenue and 8th Avenue line supposed sent to Williamburg? Was the 2nd Avenue line supposed to be sent on the Manhattan Bridge?

Look up the IND second system

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like the corridor between the (G) & the (E)(M) at Court Sq should have 2 countdown clocks so you can tell if you need to run to catch that last-minute train or if you can walk because you already missed it 😂

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Supreme R143 won't be on the Canarsie line for a while. There are graffiti lines on the outside of the train's wrap but front and back of the train still looks new. 

Edited by Calvin
  • LMAO! 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, paulrivera said:

Why's the (A) stopping at 163rd and 155th southbound all the time now? I'm assuming it's to fill in the gaps in (C) train service but I'm curious to see if that's actually true...

I've had that happen to me as well years ago, and my guess is that's the case. The waits for the (C) train can be insanely long (the countdown clocks are quite inaccurate on the (C) to boot) and I've also had "express" (A) trains go local at random. Pain in the @ss. Whenever I needed to be Uptown, I eventually started skipping the subway entirely and went by car. Between the excessive long waits, packed trains and the random switching, it was just too much.

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, paulrivera said:

Why's the (A) stopping at 163rd and 155th southbound all the time now? I'm assuming it's to fill in the gaps in (C) train service but I'm curious to see if that's actually true...

Its cause of a G.O that will be going on until October... there are midday layups on the S/B express track so the (A) has to go local.

Edited by trainfan22
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, trainfan22 said:

Its cause of a G.O that will be going on until October... there are midday layups on the S/B express track so the (A) has to go local.

And what about the other times? The (A) just randomly went express.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

And what about the other times? The (A) just randomly went express.

IDK about them other times, but in recent weeks the S/B (A) runs local between 168th and 145th cause of the G.O.

Edited by trainfan22
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/18/2021 at 3:56 PM, Amiri the subway guy said:

How did the idea came about? Why was it build? Was the 6th Avenue line always meant to go there? Why wasn’t Grand Street build to be converted to island platforms for 2nd Avenue? Wasn’t the 6th Avenue and 8th Avenue line supposed sent to Williamburg? Was the 2nd Avenue line supposed to be sent on the Manhattan Bridge?

I wish the Chrystie St connection didn't exist and used the bellmouth's at Whitehall St as a replacement for the Ashland Place connection in order to get rid of the Nassau loop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/16/2021 at 9:09 PM, CenSin said:

Infrastructure-wise, if you can call the post-unification system “IND” then some of the more poorly done jobs would be:

  • The Chrystie Street connector
    • Look no further than last month’s weekend service changes for supporting evidence.
  • The 36 Street connector connecting 63 Street to Queens Boulevard
    • Took away much of the trackage for train storage, making it only useful for half-length trains. Arguably, storage tracks aren’t that useful from a passenger’s perspective anyway.
  • The Archer Avenue extension
    • No connection between upper and lower levels means that when one level is taken out of service for construction work, its associated routes are truncated instead of being routed to the other level.

Pre-unification, these would be great examples of poor planning on the IND’s part:

  • Court Street
    • Dead-ends in Brooklyn.
  • World Trade Center
    • No tail tracks.
  • 145 Street as a terminal for local trains
    • Though to their credit, they probably never intended 145 Street to be a regular terminal—only Bedford Park Boulevard.

Was there something that happened specifically with the Chrystie St connector last month requiring it to be out of service? I didn’t see anything about that. Only that the (D) and (F) were reversed in Brooklyn, and they seem to be doing quite a lot of that lately. What specifically is wrong with the Chrystie connector that could be made better? 

There’s plenty wrong with the 36th St connector. Not least of which is the way it was connected into the Queens Blvd Line forcing even more reverse-branching onto the line. They can run more Manhattan-bound trains than before, but they still run less service than the line was designed for. The best remedy is to have all local service use the 53rd St tunnel and all express service use the 63rd St tunnel, but the MTA doesn’t seem open to that idea. Probably a sizable amount of riders aren’t either. 

On 8/17/2021 at 12:25 PM, R32 3838 said:

 

 

That's because the lines were intended to go further out east with the (J) going as far as Hollis and the (E) as far as Springfield Blvd or Rosedale

At the very least, they should have gone as far as Merrick Blvd/168th St to fully replace the elevated (J) line in central Jamaica and to better connect with the many bus routes that run through there. But they only designed the lower level (J) tunnel to be extended that way and designed the upper level (E) tunnel to turn southeast towards Laurelton/Rosedale. MTA willingness aside (because that’s always going to be an issue), how difficult would it be to build an extension off the (E) tail tracks that goes towards Merrick Blvd?

18 hours ago, ActiveCity said:

I wish the Chrystie St connection didn't exist and used the bellmouth's at Whitehall St as a replacement for the Ashland Place connection in order to get rid of the Nassau loop.

Why? What could the Whitehall St bell mouths do for service in South Brooklyn that the Chrystie St and Ashland Place connections can’t do?

Edited by T to Dyre Avenue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/16/2021 at 6:09 PM, CenSin said:

Infrastructure-wise, if you can call the post-unification system “IND” then some of the more poorly done jobs would be:

  • The Chrystie Street connector
    • Look no further than last month’s weekend service changes for supporting evidence.
  • The 36 Street connector connecting 63 Street to Queens Boulevard
    • Took away much of the trackage for train storage, making it only useful for half-length trains. Arguably, storage tracks aren’t that useful from a passenger’s perspective anyway.
  • The Archer Avenue extension
    • No connection between upper and lower levels means that when one level is taken out of service for construction work, its associated routes are truncated instead of being routed to the other level.

Pre-unification, these would be great examples of poor planning on the IND’s part:

  • Court Street
    • Dead-ends in Brooklyn.
  • World Trade Center
    • No tail tracks.
  • 145 Street as a terminal for local trains
    • Though to their credit, they probably never intended 145 Street to be a regular terminal—only Bedford Park Boulevard.
  • Chrystie St was smart, if only because it directed people from Nassau (a place they weren't really trying to go) to Midtown (a place that they were). The only issue there is the interlining after DeKalb, but that also existed before the Chrystie St connection.
  • 36 St - the entire 63 St line was a mess, and the connection was bad because it did not properly link to Queens Plaza. Though the original sin there is even worse; 53rd St should have been four tracks to start with, so then we wouldn't have had to build the 11th St connection and introduce all the reverse-branching in Queens.
  • In the same vein, the Court St and WTC problems could've been solved if the Eighth Avenue trains under the river had been four tracks instead of the two.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here’s a question how festable would a 4 track 3rd Avenue Line building. 
 

So I propose having The T train start at White plains rd gun hill rd transfer to the 2 and 5 trains. Then it will go to Williams bridge Gun hill rd

meeting up with the V train. The T train will be the full time local the V train will be the weekday only express. Local service only stops 

204 st

187th st

180st st

171st st Claremont pkwy

168th st

163rd st

156th st

Local and Express service stops

Bedford park blvd

Fordham plaza

Tremont Park 177th st

3 ave 149th st

3 ave 138th st

They both trains will run to Manhattan via the 3rd ave tunnel. The 2nd ave express tracks would be build on the lower level 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm...🧐

Some Reroutes

Some southbound (5) trains are making local stops from 125 St to Grand Central-42 St to alleviate crowd conditions along Central Park West from New York's Homecoming Concert in Central Park.

Posted: 08/21/2021 08:43PM

Edited by BM5 via Woodhaven
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/16/2021 at 9:09 PM, CenSin said:

Infrastructure-wise, if you can call the post-unification system “IND” then some of the more poorly done jobs would be:

  • The Chrystie Street connector
    • Look no further than last month’s weekend service changes for supporting evidence.
  • The 36 Street connector connecting 63 Street to Queens Boulevard
    • Took away much of the trackage for train storage, making it only useful for half-length trains. Arguably, storage tracks aren’t that useful from a passenger’s perspective anyway.
  • The Archer Avenue extension
    • No connection between upper and lower levels means that when one level is taken out of service for construction work, its associated routes are truncated instead of being routed to the other level.

Pre-unification, these would be great examples of poor planning on the IND’s part:

  • Court Street
    • Dead-ends in Brooklyn.
  • World Trade Center
    • No tail tracks.
  • 145 Street as a terminal for local trains
    • Though to their credit, they probably never intended 145 Street to be a regular terminal—only Bedford Park Boulevard.

The World Trade Center one could have been done in 1966 when constuction on the complex started (and especially when the Singer Tower was torn down in 1967) by redoing the area north of Cortlandt Street to where the WTC tracks from the (E) continued onto the Cortlandt Street portion of the Montague Street line and severed the Broadway connection, with City Hall becoming the terminal it was originally intended to be and the lower level of City Hall on the (R) being finished and used full-time (or found a way to keep that connect AND allow trains from Chambers-WTC to connect to the Montague/4th Avenue line). Then, and especially if you also rebuilt what became the Culver shuttle into full-time use (in necessary using a flyover and building an upper level of Ditmas Avenue for northbound trains), you could have an alternate way for the (F) to reach the Culver Line when G.O.s where necessary and also resume having a full-time line on Culver from 4th Avenue. 

Maybe in that scenario, you could have had the (E) run from 95th-Bay Ridge to Jamaica Center as it does now as the main 4th Avenue local and moved the (R) elsewhere.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

The World Trade Center one could have been done in 1966 when constuction on the complex started (and especially when the Singer Tower was torn down in 1967) by redoing the area north of Cortlandt Street to where the WTC tracks from the (E) continued onto the Cortlandt Street portion of the Montague Street line and severed the Broadway connection, with City Hall becoming the terminal it was originally intended to be and the lower level of City Hall on the (R) being finished and used full-time (or found a way to keep that connect AND allow trains from Chambers-WTC to connect to the Montague/4th Avenue line). Then, and especially if you also rebuilt what became the Culver shuttle into full-time use (in necessary using a flyover and building an upper level of Ditmas Avenue for northbound trains), you could have an alternate way for the (F) to reach the Culver Line when G.O.s where necessary and also resume having a full-time line on Culver from 4th Avenue. 

Maybe in that scenario, you could have had the (E) run from 95th-Bay Ridge to Jamaica Center as it does now as the main 4th Avenue local and moved the (R) elsewhere.

I honestly believe the (E) would do a much better job running in South Brooklyn compared to the (R). Not only is the line pretty short, but it's also express on one of the busiest lines in NYC which I personally believe does not deserve because it's short. With the (E) extended from WTC going further down in Manhattan and into South Brooklyn, I believe riders along 4 Av would have a better time, especially to those that are coming from other lines such as Sea Beach or West End.

I've ridden the (R) and I still have issues with the line even with CBTC and all of it being fully R160's. My experience hasn't changed, then again we're still in COVID and there are still crew shortages, but I don't doubt nothing is going to change the (R). The (E) to Bay Ridge would probably still have the same issues as the (R), but there is more demand for the (E) in general. 

If a connection were to ever be made, I believe the (W) should also be extended into Brooklyn more often. It is after all a huge shift in service and Broadway doesn't have many connections with 8 Av lines. The only areas you have any sort of connections are all of QBL, 42 St between Times Square and Port Authority Bus Terminal which is a pretty long transfer so it isn't really worth the transfer, and Jay St. There are no other transfers at all, especially when it comes to lower Manhattan and Brooklyn. I would've said extend the (R) because people are familiar with it, but the (W) is based out of Coney Island. Maybe renovating the lower level of 9 Av would help with that which will leave the (R) at lower level City Hall all to itself.

I'm not sure if a rebuild of the Culver shuttle is possible at this point. Although, if this were to happen, that would allow for better use of the extended (W) because there's more reasons for it. It would still be able to have access to Coney Island yard through two different ways.

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.