SUBWAY - Random Thoughts Topic

[VIP]

R142’s on the   are now getting the LED lights and door mats... 

Edited August 3, 2018 by VIP

[Missabassie]

On 8/3/2018 at 12:29 AM, VIP said:

R142’s on the   are now getting the LED lights and door mats... 

Yup, I saw 7111-7115 with the upgrade a couple months ago....  Speaking of which, I was on the  train yesterday with the LED upgrade and boy do those ol' 62A's look a lot better. Set: 1855-1851.

Edited August 4, 2018 by Missabassie

[Calvin]

Well, 2221-5 has the new LED lights with destination signs

unfortunately

 

it's at Westchester for Pelham service

Edited August 6, 2018 by Calvin

[jon2305]

Anyone know when exactly the 42nd Shuttle Reconstruction project is suppose to begin?

[4 via Mosholu]

32 minutes ago, jon2305 said:

Anyone know when exactly the 42nd Shuttle Reconstruction project is suppose to begin?

The 42nd Street Shuttle reconstruction project had actually been planned as far back as 1998 to be done in two phases, but the project was delayed because of the nature of the platforms at Times Square. it was supposed to start up again around 2007 after planning had already been done by 2006, but there was a lack of funds needed to do so. If I remember correctly, the reconstruction project has already been underway since June of this year. However, it entails the removal of the middle track (Track 3), which initially served as the northbound express track. The northbound local track (Track 4) is going to be kept.

[Lawrence St]

47 minutes ago, 4 via Mosholu said:

The 42nd Street Shuttle reconstruction project had actually been planned as far back as 1998 to be done in two phases, but the project was delayed because of the nature of the platforms at Times Square. it was supposed to start up again around 2007 after planning had already been done by 2006, but there was a lack of funds needed to do so. If I remember correctly, the reconstruction project has already been underway since June of this year. However, it entails the removal of the middle track (Track 3), which initially served as the northbound express track. The northbound local track (Track 4) is going to be kept.

They changed it? I thought they were going to remove Track 4 and keep Track 3.

[4 via Mosholu]

53 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

They changed it? I thought they were going to remove Track 4 and keep Track 3.

Yeah, they sure did change the plans with those tracks. I expected Track 4 to be removed as well, but this makes sense because they wish to keep the connection to the original portion of the Broadway Seventh Avenue line intact.

[LGA Link N Train]

4 hours ago, 4 via Mosholu said:

Yeah, they sure did change the plans with those tracks. I expected Track 4 to be removed as well, but this makes sense because they wish to keep the connection to the original portion of the Broadway Seventh Avenue line intact.

If that's the case, then the interlocking between Times Square and Grand Central would dramatically have to be altered in order to preserve the connection. 

[Caelestor]

Should the  run local east of Jackson Heights on late nights? The  would be slower by 2 minutes but the busy local stations in that stretch get double the service and transfer penalties are reduced.

[LGA Link N Train]

Here's a map out-lining what the Program for Action could've been like. Feel free to edit

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1BJ70ZX4GIWP1_Ip2aXKQZEI_X_CKbWDU&usp=sharing

[CenSin]

1 hour ago, Caelestor said:

Should the  run local east of Jackson Heights on late nights? The  would be slower by 2 minutes but the busy local stations in that stretch get double the service and transfer penalties are reduced.

My buying a home east of Forest Hills is contingent on 24/7 express service. I’m sure those who are already living there would fight fangs and claws for continued express service.

Anywhere that is 40 minutes away from the core (34 Street) by local service should have express service where redundant routes make it possible. Examples:

• along 7 Avenue (north of 34 Street–Penn Station) for the Bronx
• along Lexington Avenue (north of Grand Central–42 Street) for the Bronx
• along Eastern Parkway for Brooklyn
• along Central Park West for the Bronx
• along Queens Boulevard (east of Forest Hills–71 Avenue)
• over Manhattan Bridge and along 4 Avenue for southeastern Brooklyn ( via tunnel)

[Via Garibaldi 8]

6 minutes ago, CenSin said:

My buying a home east of Forest Hills is contingent on 24/7 express service. I’m sure those who are already living there would fight fangs and claws for continued express service.

Anywhere that is 40 minutes away from the core (34 Street) by local service should have express service where redundant routes make it possible. Examples:

• along 7 Avenue (north of 34 Street–Penn Station) for the Bronx
• along Lexington Avenue (north of Grand Central–42 Street) for the Bronx
• along Eastern Parkway for Brooklyn
• along Central Park West for the Bronx
• along Queens Boulevard (east of Forest Hills–71 Avenue)
• over Manhattan Bridge and along 4 Avenue for southeastern Brooklyn ( via tunnel)

Forest Hills is prime real estate because it has a plethora of transportation options. Not everyone there runs to the subway. Lots of express bus and LIRR riders too. Very expensive area, especially Forest Hills Gardens.

[darkstar8983]

 

51 minutes ago, CenSin said:

My buying a home east of Forest Hills is contingent on 24/7 express service. I’m sure those who are already living there would fight fangs and claws for continued express service.

Anywhere that is 40 minutes away from the core (34 Street) by local service should have express service where redundant routes make it possible. Examples:

• along 7 Avenue (north of 34 Street–Penn Station) for the Bronx
• along Lexington Avenue (north of Grand Central–42 Street) for the Bronx
• along Eastern Parkway for Brooklyn
• along Central Park West for the Bronx
• along Queens Boulevard (east of Forest Hills–71 Avenue)
• over Manhattan Bridge and along 4 Avenue for southeastern Brooklyn ( via tunnel)

The  via tunnel would make the Brighton Line much slower than it already is. Remember that there were no GOs that would make the  go from Astoria to Coney Island via Whitehall St and Broadway Local during the almost 7 years that the  was going to Astoria because it would make the route too long. Going from Coney Island to 34 St on weekdays is faster via Sea Beach/4 Av Express than via Brighton Local, but yes the  should run via the Manhattan Bridge (keeping the  on the Manhattan Bridge too), but that would require the  to run 24/7 north of Whitehall St.

[Caelestor]

20 minutes ago, darkstar8983 said:

 

The  via tunnel would make the Brighton Line much slower than it already is. Remember that there were no GOs that would make the  go from Astoria to Coney Island via Whitehall St and Broadway Local during the almost 7 years that the  was going to Astoria because it would make the route too long. Going from Coney Island to 34 St on weekdays is faster via Sea Beach/4 Av Express than via Brighton Local, but yes the  should run via the Manhattan Bridge (keeping the  on the Manhattan Bridge too), but that would require the  to run 24/7 north of Whitehall St.

Presumably Broadway is the busiest trunk line at night, so it's possible a full-time  + full-time  over the Bridge could be implemented in the future. Then the  could stay express overnights, as I strongly advocate for most high-ridership non-elevated stations to have 10 minute headways at night. 

[CenSin]

24 minutes ago, darkstar8983 said:

 

The  via tunnel would make the Brighton Line much slower than it already is. Remember that there were no GOs that would make the  go from Astoria to Coney Island via Whitehall St and Broadway Local during the almost 7 years that the  was going to Astoria because it would make the route too long. Going from Coney Island to 34 St on weekdays is faster via Sea Beach/4 Av Express than via Brighton Local, but yes the  should run via the Manhattan Bridge (keeping the  on the Manhattan Bridge too), but that would require the  to run 24/7 north of Whitehall St.

You could say the same for the , no? The running 4 Avenue local is the same run time as the running Brighton local from Coney Island to Atlantic Avenue. The running to Astoria also takes longer than the running to 96 Street. All is in favor of cutting run time off the and shifting it to the ; the shift would make both routes closer together in run time.

[R68OnBroadway]

1 hour ago, Caelestor said:

Presumably Broadway is the busiest trunk line at night, so it's possible a full-time  + full-time  over the Bridge could be implemented in the future. Then the  could stay express overnights, as I strongly advocate for most high-ridership non-elevated stations to have 10 minute headways at night. 

Headways during overnight should be no more than 15-20 mins (for lines like the RPK ) , and should be about 12 on average.

[Around the Horn]

1 hour ago, CenSin said:

You could say the same for the , no? The running 4 Avenue local is the same run time as the running Brighton local from Coney Island to Atlantic Avenue. The running to Astoria also takes longer than the running to 96 Street. All is in favor of cutting run time off the and shifting it to the ; the shift would make both routes closer together in run time.

I would rather make the express on 4th Avenue than making the running time longer and the running time shorter.

[CenSin]

8 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

I would rather make the express on 4th Avenue than making the running time longer and the running time shorter.

How would that service pattern be implemented? DeKalb Avenue would have no 6 Avenue service at all at night if the skipped it.

[biGC323232]

15 hours ago, CenSin said:

My buying a home east of Forest Hills is contingent on 24/7 express service. I’m sure those who are already living there would fight fangs and claws for continued express service.

Anywhere that is 40 minutes away from the core (34 Street) by local service should have express service where redundant routes make it possible. Examples:

• along 7 Avenue (north of 34 Street–Penn Station) for the Bronx
• along Lexington Avenue (north of Grand Central–42 Street) for the Bronx
• along Eastern Parkway for Brooklyn
• along Central Park West for the Bronx
• along Queens Boulevard (east of Forest Hills–71 Avenue)
• over Manhattan Bridge and along 4 Avenue for southeastern Brooklyn ( via tunnel)

I actually can agree with all of the above...But doesnt the  already has exp service 24/7 along CPW...

[Lance]

3 hours ago, CenSin said:

How would that service pattern be implemented? DeKalb Avenue would have no 6 Avenue service at all at night if the skipped it.

It's possible for a Bridge train to hit DeKalb Av and then run express on 4th Avenue. From the north tracks of the bridge, trains would switch over to Brighton track the and use presently to stop at DeKalb Av. Following that stop, it could switch over to the 4th Avenue local track and merge with the . Directly before Atlantic Av, the train would then switch over to the express track. Invert that for Manhattan-bound service. Of course, I wouldn't recommend it in any way because the weaving back and forth does nothing to minimize those often-complained about merging delays, even if it is in the middle of the night.

15 hours ago, CenSin said:

My buying a home east of Forest Hills is contingent on 24/7 express service. I’m sure those who are already living there would fight fangs and claws for continued express service.

Anywhere that is 40 minutes away from the core (34 Street) by local service should have express service where redundant routes make it possible. Examples:

• along 7 Avenue (north of 34 Street–Penn Station) for the Bronx
• along Lexington Avenue (north of Grand Central–42 Street) for the Bronx
• along Eastern Parkway for Brooklyn
• along Central Park West for the Bronx
• along Queens Boulevard (east of Forest Hills–71 Avenue)
• over Manhattan Bridge and along 4 Avenue for southeastern Brooklyn ( via tunnel)

These kinds of service ideas really spit in the face of late night riders.  Let's run through the list, shall we:

 7th Avenue Express - Are we really proposing to relegate local service north of Times Square to just the line? That idea was deemed terrible nearly two decades ago, which is why the started running local during overnight hours to reduce wait times.

Lexington Ave Express - See previous. It's the same reason why the  was extended from its previous late night terminal at 125 Street.

 Eastern Pkwy Express - Ditto.

Central Park West Exp - The only reason why the continues to run express along that sector is because the line is long enough as is. However, if there was enough push from riders, you can bet it would become a late night local as well, just like the did back in 2015.

 Queens Blvd Express - I guess Sutphin-Hillside doesn't need late night service, right? There's no way for an express to hit Sutphin Blvd without new switches being installed after Briarwood, which I don't see happening anytime soon. Even if you meant the , which isn't any better quite frankly, there is very little gained by skipping Briarwood and 75 Avenue other than maybe a minute on travel time.

The only one I don't really have a problem with is the via Bridge/4th Avenue express and that's because the and are still there providing service every ten minutes on paper. However, I have to agree with the consensus that shifting the to Whitehall would only make an already slow trip out of Brooklyn even slower. If I'm not mistaken, the via Brighton is one of the slowest trips out of Coney Island, second only to the via Culver. Why make that trip more annoying when the present setup works well enough?

As you can probably gather, the point I'm trying to make is that late night operations cannot be solely based on the speed of the trip. With such large intervals between trains, some services have to run local to reduce wait times for customers, even if express service makes more sense from an operational standpoint. The only alternative would be to shorten the intervals and Transit does not seem interested in that avenue.

[Coney Island Av]

The only lines that run express during late nights are:

- between 145 St and West 4 St

- between Forest Hills-71 Av and 21 St-Queensbridge

Before, the following lines used to run express during nights:

- between 57 St-7 Av and Canal St (until 2015)

- between 96 St and Chambers St (until 1999)

- between 125 St and Brooklyn Bridge (when the  operated to Brooklyn Bridge late nights during the 90s)

- between Forest Hills-71 Av and Queens Plaza (until 1997)

But IMO it would be good to make the  express on 4 Av during late nights. The  and  both can adequately cover the local stops. Yes, riders lose 6 Av service at Dekalb, but that's the case on weekends when the  doesn't run.  to Whitehall is a non-starter due to making one long trip even longer. 

I agree with running the  express between Franklin Av and Borough Hall because it already skips Hoyt St during late nights. Having it run express would eliminate the need for it to merge with the  at Nevins and would not only speed up service, but it would also eliminate merging. 

[Lawrence St]

8 minutes ago, Coney Island Av said:

The only lines that run express during late nights are:

- between 145 St and West 4 St

- between Forest Hills-71 Av and 21 St-Queensbridge

Before, the following lines used to run express during nights:

- between 57 St-7 Av and Canal St (until 2015)

- between 96 St and Chambers St (until 1999)

- between 125 St and Brooklyn Bridge (when the  operated to Brooklyn Bridge late nights during the 90s)

- between Forest Hills-71 Av and Queens Plaza (until 1997)

But IMO it would be good to make the  express on 4 Av during late nights. The  and  both can adequately cover the local stops. Yes, riders lose 6 Av service at Dekalb, but that's the case on weekends when the  doesn't run.  to Whitehall is a non-starter due to making one long trip even longer. 

I agree with running the  express between Franklin Av and Borough Hall because it already skips Hoyt St during late nights. Having it run express would eliminate the need for it to merge with the  at Nevins and would not only speed up service, but it would also eliminate merging. 

The should run Express at least between 125th St and Grand Central during late nights.

[RR503]

Save for the  proposal, most ideas being thrown around here are ones reducing the number of lines at a local station from 2 to 1. My question to you all is whether you think that the resultant increase in median wait time (from 5 to 10 mins) will be outweighed by the express service being provided. I personally don’t think so, but I’ve yet to do the math.

When doing those calculations, I’d also keep in mind the irregularity inherent in late night service — I don’t want to go too mathy on you all, but the standard deviation in headways generally increases as the scheduled headway increases — that’s another factor that must be taken into account. Moreover, the fewer lines at any station, the more riders from there have to transfer — in other words the more they’re subjected to that late night irregularity. Again, I think that given single line infrequency at those hours, preserving connectivity and aggregate frequency needs to be prioritized, rather than sacrificed to benefit a few to the tune of a few minutes. 

Now, as for the  express proposal. While it may save riders a or 2 minutes between Barclays and Franklin, the  would have to cross back onto the local track after Franklin — meaning it must share with the , even if it is for just a short stretch. I’d thus much rather save folks at EP local stations the time and transfers than do this, given that it really isn’t helping operationally. 

Edited August 7, 2018 by RR503

[LGA Link N Train]

What would a deinterlined late night look like?

[R68OnBroadway]

Does anyone know the terminal TPH capacity of Ocean Parkway? I know that Brighton is limited by the curve right before it, but how much would you be able to gain if you moved the terminal to Ocean Pkwy? If it increases by a few tph, would it be worth it to do so to increase  capacity?