SUBWAY - Random Thoughts Topic

[N6 Limited]

I'd swap the Northern terminals for the  and the  , use that City hall Lower Level. Perhaps store the trains on the Sea Beach Express.

[Around the Horn]

So this was on the  this evening:

[R68OnBroadway]

23 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

I'd swap the Northern terminals for the  and the  , use that City hall Lower Level. Perhaps store the trains on the Sea Beach Express.

The  would lose its yard, and having trains on different lines at different times of week wouldn't be too great. If I were to restructure QBL, I would do it this way.

 

  operates as normal.

  via 53rd rather than 63rd weekdays only (except late nights), this is to take pressure off the  .

 operates as normal.

 operates via 63rd now. Weekends  and late nights the  will take over for 63rd.

While some riders find this confusing, they did something like this back before the connector opened, where the  would go to Queensbridge on weekends and the  on weekdays. If people are too confused still, they can just take the tram or walk to 36th if they can't get that the  replaces the  outside of weekdays.

[RR503]

15 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said:

The  would lose its yard, and having trains on different lines at different times of week wouldn't be too great. If I were to restructure QBL, I would do it this way.

 

  operates as normal.

  via 53rd rather than 63rd weekdays only (except late nights), this is to take pressure off the  .

 operates as normal.

 operates via 63rd now. Weekends  and late nights the  will take over for 63rd.

While some riders find this confusing, they did something like this back before the connector opened, where the  would go to Queensbridge on weekends and the  on weekdays. If people are too confused still, they can just take the tram or walk to 36th if they can't get that the  replaces the  outside of weekdays.

By doing that, you’re bringing back Queens boulevard of yore — an overcrowded, expressophilic mess. The  going to 63rd takes half of exp service to a less busy corridor, forcing riders to at least consider the local. Putting it back on 53 and the  on 63 not only gives riders little reason to stay on the local destination-wise, but also eliminates xfers to the  and  from half of trains serving QB local west of Roosevelt.  

That will once again create massive platform crowds, demonic express trains, and underutilized locals, all for what benefit? Putting things back “the way they should be”? Creating variety on 63? There’s a reason the current service pattern exists, and it’s a good one.

[biGC323232]

1 hour ago, Around the Horn said:

So this was on the  this evening:

There's my R160  train..😀😀.Why  all of a sudden ci cars poppin up on  service..Didn't you catch a R68a a couple months back....

[Lance]

On ‎10‎/‎31‎/‎2017 at 12:10 PM, Bosco said:

Plus, the FIND was one of the first spec changes.  The R160s originally were supposed to have the same strip maps as the R142/R143.  Back in the early 2000s, screen technology wasn't as cheap as it is now.  Prices only fell through the floor a few years ago.

I'm glad Transit realized how completely useless those strip maps would've been the 160s.

21 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

This is why Bergen Lower level should re-open to provide a connection before the crosstown diverge.

The likelihood of that happening is slim to none. Reopening the platforms on the lower level would require a massive amount of money given they are practically a shell at this point. As such, it would likely also run into ADA regulations, with advocates calling for elevators and other accessibility components.

11 hours ago, RR503 said:

By doing that, you’re bringing back Queens boulevard of yore — an overcrowded, expressophilic mess. The  going to 63rd takes half of exp service to a less busy corridor, forcing riders to at least consider the local. Putting it back on 53 and the  on 63 not only gives riders little reason to stay on the local destination-wise, but also eliminates xfers to the  and  from half of trains serving QB local west of Roosevelt.  

That will once again create massive platform crowds, demonic express trains, and underutilized locals, all for what benefit? Putting things back “the way they should be”? Creating variety on 63? There’s a reason the current service pattern exists, and it’s a good one.

It also woefully underserves 63rd Street. In the Summer of '01, part of the service testing included running the  trains via 63rd Street while retaining the on 53rd Street. With the 's reduced TPH compared to that of the  , the idea was considered a bust as it did not alleviate any of the congestion along 53rd Street, nor did it have the potential to pull any riders off the  or lines. Transit also took into consideration the transfer potential along 53rd Street. With both the and there, riders have the option of both local and express service. Take that away and riders seeking local Queens Blvd stops have to transfer at Queens Plaza for the . That has not changed despite the letter designation change in 2010.

The above suggestion also confuses and annoys riders as 63rd Street would be served by Queens Blvd locals on weekdays and expresses during the off-hours. Sorry if your destination was Northern Blvd. Change at Roosevelt Av to backtrack. Things have got to be consistent here.

[CenSin]

24 minutes ago, Lance said:

Reopening the platforms on the lower level would require a massive amount of money given they are practically a shell at this point. As such, it would likely also run into ADA regulations, with advocates calling for elevators and other accessibility components.

Imagine if 86 Street and Lexington Avenue went through the same thing and the MTA implicitly tells the public, “sorry folks, but ADA law makes it impossible to fix this station cheaply and the guys above ground don’t want 3 years of construction work. You’ll have to stick with local service.”

[Lance]

2 minutes ago, CenSin said:

Imagine if 86 Street and Lexington Avenue went through the same thing and the MTA implicitly tells the public, “sorry folks, but ADA law makes it impossible to fix this station cheaply and the guys above ground don’t want 3 years of construction work. You’ll have to stick with local service.”

I never said I agreed with this. Quite frankly, I find it ludicrous that is the standard excuse the MTA gives for things of this nature, but you know that is exactly what they'll say if it's ever proposed to restore Bergen St back to full express/local status. Probably in some flowery prose to soften the blow, but the same nonetheless. This is yet another one of those instances where the local politicians need to get involved and advocate for their constituents. Of course, it all depends on whether the Culver express is actually successful, but if the need is there, it should definitely be looked into.

[N6 Limited]

2 hours ago, Lance said:

The likelihood of that happening is slim to none. Reopening the platforms on the lower level would require a massive amount of money given they are practically a shell at this point. As such, it would likely also run into ADA regulations, with advocates calling for elevators and other accessibility components.

Can't they get a waiver? The Station doesn't have elevators now, they'd just be reopening a lower level.

[Union Tpke]

Look what we have here!

IMG_1988 by Union Turnpike, on Flickr

IMG_1987 by Union Turnpike, on Flickr

IMG_1986 by Union Turnpike, on Flickr

IMG_1985 by Union Turnpike, on Flickr

I saw five Cuomo sets today.

[Bosco]

1 hour ago, N6 Limited said:

Can't they get a waiver? The Station doesn't have elevators now, they'd just be reopening a lower level.

The MTA would need to justify not putting in elevators (too much money, too difficult engineering-wise, etc).

I don't know how Bergen is laid out in terms of staircases, but are there any abandoned staircases that could be converted?  Many of the CPW stations south of 110 St have abandoned staircases that could either be reopened or, ideally, converted to elevators.

[JTrainUK]

21 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

So this was on the  this evening:

Interesting. I rode on an R160  Train the other week, Monday 23rd October I believe, so not as rare as it may seem. Still a nice catch though.  

[MysteriousBtrain]

8 minutes ago, JTrainUK said:

Interesting. I rode on an R160  Train the other week, Monday 23rd October I believe, so not as rare as it may seem. Still a nice catch though.  

This is a Siemens set from Coney Island I believe.

Edited November 2, 2017 by MysteriousBtrain

[darkstar8983]

4 hours ago, Union Tpke said:

Look what we have here!

IMG_1988 by Union Turnpike, on Flickr

IMG_1987 by Union Turnpike, on Flickr

IMG_1986 by Union Turnpike, on Flickr

IMG_1985 by Union Turnpike, on Flickr

I saw five Cuomo sets today.

Wow. Another Coney Island R160 swapped to Jamaica. Why not just modernize their own yard’s cars. I wonder which Jamaica R160 is now the placeholder taking its place.

[paulrivera]

Interesting move by the  expanding the midday GO window to 9:30am to 3:30pm. I get why they did it (to increase worker productivity) but won't it affect service quality at the tail end when the schools let out?

[CenSin]

5 hours ago, Bosco said:

The MTA would need to justify not putting in elevators (too much money, too difficult engineering-wise, etc).

I don't know how Bergen is laid out in terms of staircases, but are there any abandoned staircases that could be converted?  Many of the CPW stations south of 110 St have abandoned staircases that could either be reopened or, ideally, converted to elevators.

If the elevators fail as often as they currently do, I would rather have them reopen as stairs that work 24/7 than elevators that broken and make you walk to the other end of the station to get in/out.

[Daniel The Cool]

On 11/1/2017 at 3:51 PM, N6 Limited said:

So last night the  was running express, while the  was terminating at 34th St and so they had trains waiting for the  to clear before being able to proceed. Why don't they just switch the to the local track at 14th street until 34th street so that it's not held up?

That  Train could've ran express by the dispatcher for either being late or a switch problem at 96th Street. It's not the first time they will reroute a line express during the overnight if it's behind schedule.

 

And there's no track switch from the express tracks to the local track at 14th Street southbound. It's only from the local track to the express tracks before approaching 14th Street.

[VIP]

4 hours ago, darkstar8983 said:

Wow. Another Coney Island R160 swapped to Jamaica. Why not just modernize their own yard’s cars. I wonder which Jamaica R160 is now the placeholder taking its place.

I’m enjoying more of these R160B’s on the  but yeah I think Jamaica should have just got their own cars retrofitted. 

[Calvin]

A couple of thoughts on the line:

* I remember some stations have countdown clocks, IIRC

*Also, if the 5th car of the train isn't working properly, can the c/r move to the 6th car of the train to open and close the doors of the train (for example, 33 St-Rawson St) ?

 

[Abba]

I wanted to mention that last week Friday I got a r142 6 train.How lucky was I? How many sets are left ?

[Ntrainfave]

What's the difference between Alstom and Siemens R160s other than the sound of the motor? 

Also same question for the difference between R160A and R160B (alstom) besides the sound of the doors opening?

[Kingsbridgeviewer382]

12 minutes ago, Abba said:

I wanted to mention that last week Friday I got a r142 6 train.How lucky was I? How many sets are left ?

1 whole set and a 5 car spare iirc. The others were sent to the (4).

[Abba]

Wow so I got that set apparently. 

[Calvin]

21 minutes ago, Abba said:

I wanted to mention that last week Friday I got a r142 6 train.How lucky was I? How many sets are left ?

 

7 minutes ago, Kingsbridgeviewer382 said:

1 whole set and a 5 car spare iirc. The others were sent to the (4).

*There's only 1 R142A train with a 5-car leftover on the Pelham line: 7596-7610

[VIP]

1 hour ago, Ntrainfave said:

What's the difference between Alstom and Siemens R160s other than the sound of the motor? 

Also same question for the difference between R160A and R160B (alstom) besides the sound of the doors opening?

There’s no difference other than R160B’s having a glossier metal finish, silent door motors and different car Numbers such as 8723-8842/9103-9232 & 9803-9942

Siemens sets are essentially R160B’s aswell but with Different propulsion mechanics. Siemens sets are 8843-9102