SUBWAY - Random Thoughts Topic

[trainfanrod]

The MTA should install a free transfer to the to the at hoyt schmerhorn theres no connection from the to # lines

[CenSin]

The MTA should install a free transfer to the to the at hoyt schmerhorn theres no connection from the to # lines

This transfer would be questionable. It doesn’t benefit the or riders—not even late night since the doesn’t run on the local track west of Atlantic Avenue.

[Fresh Pond]

The MTA should install a free transfer to the to the at hoyt schmerhorn theres no connection from the to # lines

Court Sq...

[BronxBombers]

This is why there's literary nothing that can be done to reduce overcrowding and delays on the , especially since it already has its own riders from Archer Avenue to deal with, because riders just don't stop relying on "express" trains. This is also why local Queens Boulevard customers can't even just simply stay on the and either.

 

The only one I can think of is the passageway idea, but like Q43 said the MTA is broke as hell. It's NYC, everyone is on the go and wants a faster trip. Nobody is going to stay on the or for 5 extra stops.

[Lance]

I don't see how reducing one train on one of the two lines and adding one more train to the other is gonna make a difference...Obviously the is relatively more crowded than the because more people connect for the buses at Jamaica Center than the buses at 179 Street and more people are headed towards 53 Street than 63 Street, in part, due to the transfer to the Lexington Avenue Line. Only 3 trains operate to and from 179 Street during rush hours, meaning Hillside Avenue has slightly more service (18 tph) than Archer Avenue (12 tph).

 

I remember there was a thread where people were proposing that 51 Street on the Lexington Avenue Line should have the and expresses also stopping there. It was then confirmed that it wasn't the case because that would just lead to more overcrowding and delays on the because, then, you would have people transferring from express to express instead of the current setup of transferring from express to local or local to express. The will still be more crowded regardless of the 16/14 tph setup. It's not just the ridership on the Archer Avenue and 53 Street lines, but also people are going to/from Port Authority and Penn Station. Those on the are only going to destinations on the line itself and not the .

 

The only way I can think of reducing overcrowding and delays on the is by having Queens Boulevard local customers north of and also at Roosevelt Avenue being forced to stick to the via the transfer at Lexington Avenue-59 Street to all 3 Lexington Avenue lines (both express and local, not just one of them). Any Queens Boulevard local customers heading towards 53 Street or 6 Avenue should just stay on the . The needs to do a full-line review about this so that riders can hopefully get it and stop relying on the express trains all the time. That's why I prefer to keep the current rush hour 15/15 tph setup on the Queens Boulevard Express.

That doesn't negate the need for more 8th Avenue/Queens Blvd service, which is why the E and F's TPHs were altered in 2001.

 

Besides the astronomical cost of converting 51 Street into an express station, there is little gained from such a transfer. The Lexington Ave express lines already have two connections for Queens and west side service (Grand Central, 59 Street). Doing all that work for another connection won't make a difference.

 

The thing is, there is a significant time savings on the Queens Blvd expresses over the locals. There's a five to ten minute time differential between the two from 71 Avenue to Queens Plaza. A lot of that savings comes from the Northern Blvd bypass.

 

If there is a chance to take an express train, riders will opt for the express train to get to their destination quicker. That why I think the MTA should build a passageway connecting Lex/63rd with Lex/59th. That way people can take the to connect with the Lexington line and it could potentially reduce crowding on the and trains. Let's face it, the free walking on street level transfer isn't attractive. With the passageway, it gives Queens riders another "quicker" option to the Lexington Avenue line and the express that the doesn't offer.

Two problems with this:

1) lack of money

2) limited use - If people don't use the current out-of-system transfer on the grounds of a long walk, what makes you think they'll use it simply because it's underground?

 

But of course, the doesn't have any money

Right in one.

 

This is why there's literary nothing that can be done to reduce overcrowding and delays on the , especially since it already has its own riders from Archer Avenue to deal with, because riders just don't stop relying on "express" trains. This is also why local Queens Boulevard customers can't even just simply stay on the and either.

See my previous response.

 

The only one I can think of is the passageway idea, but like Q43 said the MTA is broke as hell. It's NYC, everyone is on the go and wants a faster trip. Nobody is going to stay on the or for 5 extra stops.

This isn't like Broadway, where a lot of the problems and delays are caused by the track layout. What I mean by that is: if you're on an R train to Canal St from Queens Plaza, you really shouldn't try transferring to the Q because any time savings gained by the express are negated by waiting for the Q.

 

Queens Blvd really doesn't have that problem, at least not to the extent that we see on Broadway. Those tracks are relatively isolated and people aren't going to spend an extra ten minutes on the local if the express could get them there faster and it's across the platform.

[MHV9218]

3578, which had a 1980s-spec "M" NYCT logo, has now received the bland MTA stickers to match the rest of the fleet. That car and 3718--the last R32 in revenue service with the "M" logo--have both been transferred to East New York barn.

 

Here's how 3578 used to look:

 

 

Interesting note about 3718: that car DID have the new spec MTA NYC Subway sticker until about 2010. The car worked as a garbage pair from 2008/2009 on, and at some point the sticker was either removed or the metal disc replaced. As a result, we get to see this piece of history...as seen today:

 

Edited June 20, 2015 by MHV9218

[Calvin]

Fold-up seats are removed on R143 8312, wonder if there will be more to be removed..

 

Also, Does the usually arrive in a pattern of # of trains? I was at 14 St and 5 trains were back-to-back with each other

Edited June 20, 2015 by Calvin

[Cait Sith]

There's a split section GO on the line overnight this week and next week. Although if you guys are all seeing it outside of overnight hours, either the GO is throwing the fleets off (probable) or there's something more to it (not as likely.)

 

I'll keep my eyes on the R142A's on the just in case though...

I saw the set roughly before 10pm, so this kinda makes sense. I also didn't know of the split sections until I checked out the G.O posters today.

Edited June 20, 2015 by Cait Sith

[ttcsubwayfan]

Does anyone know when the repairs to 168 and 181 St stations on the will be finished?

[BronxBombers]

Two problems with this:

 

1) lack of money

2) limited use - If people don't use the current out-of-system transfer on the grounds of a long walk, what makes you think they'll use it simply because it's underground?

 

I understand the MTA doesn't have any money for that.

If the passageway is advertised than it will attract people to connect the with Lex/59. The out-of-system transfer isn't heavily used because maybe people don't want to exit the subway system just to re-enter for a transfer or maybe people still need to transfer to a bus & the out-of-system transfer would eliminate that.

[CenSin]

We all know most people understand that the MTA and it’s sponsors don’t have money. I think when people bring it up to kill a discussion, they really mean to say it has a low benefits-to-cost ratio. There would probably be no NYCTF if nobody raised ideas due to cost.

[ttcsubwayfan]

Random question: for signals, what is a homeball? I've heard the term thrown around a bunch of times but NYCSubway's signals guide doesn't talk about it.

 

Also, on NYCSubway's series on A Day In The Life Of A Transit Worker, the term "wrap it up" is referred to several times, such as in the sentence "15 MPH out of the station until the switches, then wrap it up 'til the next curve, coast around the curve, then two points past all the timers. When the last one clears, wrap it up again and come into 96 St." What does it mean? Given the context, I'd assume full power, but for obvious reasons I can't be sure.

Edited June 21, 2015 by ttcsubwayfan

[Javier]

I just thought of something:

 

For the R142/R142A trains that have bad LED/LCD screens,why can't the yard just replace them with regular LEDS?

[trainfan22]

Random question: for signals, what is a homeball? I've heard the term thrown around a bunch of times but NYCSubway's signals guide doesn't talk about it.

 

Also, on NYCSubway's series on A Day In The Life Of A Transit Worker, the term "wrap it up" is referred to several times, such as in the sentence "15 MPH out of the station until the switches, then wrap it up 'til the next curve, coast around the curve, then two points past all the timers. When the last one clears, wrap it up again and come into 96 St." What does it mean? Given the context, I'd assume full power, but for obvious reasons I can't be sure.

homeball in a signal right before a switch, they always have two sets of signal right on top of each other.

 

The signals on the left of the photo is a homeball.....

Edited June 21, 2015 by trainfan22

[MHV9218]

Also, on NYCSubway's series on A Day In The Life Of A Transit Worker, the term "wrap it up" is referred to several times, such as in the sentence "15 MPH out of the station until the switches, then wrap it up 'til the next curve, coast around the curve, then two points past all the timers. When the last one clears, wrap it up again and come into 96 St." What does it mean? Given the context, I'd assume full power, but for obvious reasons I can't be sure.

 

Full power. On less modern controllers, the change in throttle comes with a horizontal motion or counterclockwise, something like wrapping an object. It's a less obvious metaphor on NTT equipment. 

[ttcsubwayfan]

Right on, thanks!

[Lance]

I understand the MTA doesn't have any money for that.

If the passageway is advertised than it will attract people to connect the with Lex/59. The out-of-system transfer isn't heavily used because maybe people don't want to exit the subway system just to re-enter for a transfer or maybe people still need to transfer to a bus & the out-of-system transfer would eliminate that.

We all know most people understand that the MTA and it’s sponsors don’t have money. I think when people bring it up to kill a discussion, they really mean to say it has a low benefits-to-cost ratio. There would probably be no NYCTF if nobody raised ideas due to cost.

Yeah, that's what I meant. Sorry if there was any confusion. With that said, it's still a four-block long transfer, whether it's above-ground, below ground, free or paid. It's too long to be a viable transfer option, especially with much more convenient options available. For Queens Blvd service, the R is right there at 59 Street. All of the Broadway lines are also available for west side service. If riders are looking specifically for Queens Blvd express and/or 6th Avenue service, they can take a quick ride on the 6 for the E/M trains at 51 Street. Building a transfer between 59 Street and Lexington Av-63 St would be a complete waste if that's the intention. And that's not even including the logistical hurdles to construct such a transfer in the first place. 

 

I just thought of something:

 

For the R142/R142A trains that have bad LED/LCD screens,why can't the yard just replace them with regular LEDS?

I seriously doubt the yards are sitting on several hundred mosaic LCD screens. I'd like to believe the MTA ordered some extras as part of the 142 orders in case something happened, but even if they did, that was 15 years ago and I can't see them just sitting in storage anymore.

[Union Tpke]

Subway MDBF

Screen Shot 2015-06-21 at 4.28.33 PM by spicker613, on Flickr

[ttcsubwayfan]

Very interesting. Thanks for sharing.

[Tomtoon]

R142A worst out of the NTT's interesting...

 

For the R188's would be good if there was a comparison for the NEW R188's and the converted units..

 

Does a failure for R143 count if it's a CBTC fail still?

[Javier]

 

 

I seriously doubt the yards are sitting on several hundred mosaic LCD screens. I'd like to believe the MTA ordered some extras as part of the 142 orders in case something happened, but even if they did, that was 15 years ago and I can't see them just sitting in storage anymore.

Thats not what I meant exactly, I meant LED Matrix's. Those things are cheap, and they get the job done.

[Fresh Pond]

R142A worst out of the NTT's interesting...

 

For the R188's would be good if there was a comparison for the NEW R188's and the converted units..

 

Does a failure for R143 count if it's a CBTC fail still?

New or converted, they still consider it a R188 and group it as such

[Union Tpke]

R142A worst out of the NTT's interesting...

 

For the R188's would be good if there was a comparison for the NEW R188's and the converted units..

 

Does a failure for R143 count if it's a CBTC fail still?

yes it does. That is why the R143 is so low.

[Tomtoon]

New or converted, they still consider it a R188 and group it as such

  

 

Probably why the R188's has a lower rate than the R160's then..

 

yes it does. That is why the R143 is so low.

That makes sense, still quite reliable though it seems

[Union Tpke]

We should watch the same thing with the R188s when CBTC goes on the 7 line.