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.
EE Broadway Local

SUBWAY - Random Thoughts Topic

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Non-tech trains are also getting the deep cleaning process: One set looks brand new on the (3)  with another one on the 42 St (S) with its repainted bonnets 

Edited by Calvin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/21/2019 at 7:31 PM, lara8710 said:

Just after getting off the (Q) train at 96th Street I was shocked to see water damage on the ceilings of the station, given that it only opened two years ago. The same thing has happened at Hudson Yards on the (7) not long ago. Is it that the state of the subway is fragile due to the city's geography, or does it have something to do with poor quality waterproofing during times of bad weather? I don't understand...

This tells me that the Second Avenue Subway is just about to become another Archer Avenue Subway, where all three of the stations are literally falling apart due to water intrusion. And the stations along the 63rd Street (F) line (especially Roosevelt Island) are just as bad...

Lest we forget that despite Phase 1 being several years late, it actually was rushed into opening due to political pressure. The Archer Avenue stations have devolved into hellholes, poorly designed and with bathrooms that will make you questions your sanity. I’m probably don’t use the 63rd Street line to have noticed water damage there, but it wouldn’t surprise me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/21/2019 at 11:33 AM, Maxwell179 said:

No , they said they’re increasing the frequency instead of lengthening it 

Isn't there a certain cap to how many trains you can squeeze per hour? That sounds like a bad idea. But I could be wrong.

What is the TPH limit for the crosstown?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, MassTransitHonchkrow said:

Isn't there a certain cap to how many trains you can squeeze per hour? That sounds like a bad idea. But I could be wrong.

What is the TPH limit for the crosstown?

Put simply, much higher than what they've been running at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crosstown is limited by Court Square — it can only turn around 15tph. (F) merge and Church terminal issues will bring you down to 24tph-F local tph, but you have Bedford middle to mitigate that. 

7.5 tph will not be any issue for the line. It runs slightly more than that during weekday rushes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, RR503 said:

Crosstown is limited by Court Square — it can only turn around 15tph. (F) merge and Church terminal issues will bring you down to 24tph-F local tph, but you have Bedford middle to mitigate that. 

7.5 tph will not be any issue for the line. It runs slightly more than that during weekday rushes. 

If capacity ever had to be increased on Crosstown–let's say if the Franklin Avenue Shuttle is connected to it–how would you modify the terminal layout at Court Square? How much of a difference does the pocket track make?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Cabanamaner said:

Lest we forget that despite Phase 1 being several years late, it actually was rushed into opening due to political pressure. The Archer Avenue stations have devolved into hellholes, poorly designed and with bathrooms that will make you questions your sanity. I’m probably don’t use the 63rd Street line to have noticed water damage there, but it wouldn’t surprise me.

I was just thinking about that, the Archer Ave stations look like crap, and it's the first station visitors see coming from the Airport/AirTrain.  There is always a queue of confused tourist buying metrocards and crowding the turnstiles , they clearly should have more turnstiles on the south side of the station.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

I was just thinking about that, the Archer Ave stations look like crap, and it's the first station visitors see coming from the Airport/AirTrain.  There is always a queue of confused tourist buying metrocards and crowding the turnstiles , they clearly should have more turnstiles on the south side of the station.

If anything. Sutphin/Archer and Parsons/Archer need Redesigning. I go to Sutphin on a Regular Basis, and let me tell you that the station looks run down. Not as bad as other stations along the subway, but still bad regardless. Parsons/Archer is worse in terms of maintenance, but the dark atmosphere of the station makes it unique in a way that I can’t describe. 

I’ll propose something later in the Proposals thread related to Sutphin and Parsons Archer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Union Tpke said:

If capacity ever had to be increased on Crosstown–let's say if the Franklin Avenue Shuttle is connected to it–how would you modify the terminal layout at Court Square? How much of a difference does the pocket track make?

I mean, I'd like to extend it for better transfers, but if I had to do something to Court Square, a good ol' D20 double crossover would do the trick I think. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Why was the Bergen street area designed so poorly? Trains crawl through the junction; you can't cross between sides- sometimes I wonder if they intentionally designed it that way to keep Manhattan service on the express track and Crosstown on the local... 

 

Also, how much room is there between 50th upper and where the 53rd tracks rise up? Assuming we ever deinterlined QBL we would probably need to fit a D20 or D25 switch there so the (E) could stay deinterlined while the (C) runs express without causing a delay as major as the Canal one.

Edited by R68OnBroadway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Lex said:

Put simply, much higher than what they've been running at.

That's good. I've heard that the (J) can run trains at 26 TPH. Is that still accurate?

I noticed CBTC infrastructure (namely those yellow signs) on the Culver section of the line in February 2018. Are they considering that corridor for CBTC? If so, what's the timeline for activating it?

Reader Note: I haven't rode any train into Brooklyn since May 2018.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said:

Why was the Bergen street area designed so poorly? Trains crawl through the junction; you can't cross between sides- sometimes I wonder if they intentionally designed it that way to keep Manhattan service on the express track and Crosstown on the local... 

  

Also, how much room is there between 50th upper and where the 53rd tracks rise up? Assuming we ever deinterlined QBL we would probably need to fit a D20 or D25 switch there so the (E) could stay deinterlined while the (C) runs express without causing a delay as major as the Canal one.

A lot of Bergen's speed issues come from the signal system redesign they did there in the mid-2000s. It was to be the model microprocessor controlled interlocking, but in the process of installing the equipment they riddled the area with a crapton of slow GTs. The actual ramp is good for 15; it's again the signals that force you to take it at 8-10. 

If you're good with a fair bit of structural work, you could probably work an equilateral switch from s/b local to express (and n/b exp to local) just south of 50th St. Imagine if the path the local tracks take in this video were mirrored. 

2 minutes ago, MassTransitHonchkrow said:

That's good. I've heard that the (J) can run trains at 26 TPH. Is that still accurate?

I noticed CBTC infrastructure (namely those yellow signs) on the Culver section of the line in February 2018. Are they considering that corridor for CBTC? If so, what's the timeline for activating it?

Reader Note: I haven't rode any train into Brooklyn since May 2018.

Williamsburg bridge is good for 24tph; split between (J) and (M) can (in theory) fall anywhere in there.

Yes, Culver is getting CBTC. Those of you who ride down there will notice that new, CBTC-ready signals are popping up at interlockings now. 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, subwayfan1998 said:

I've heard many said that If CBTC is fully completed in the QBL, G would recieve NTTs.

Its not really an R179 discussion, so I quoted it here.

Once QBL gets CBTC fully implemented, there wouldnt be a need for the (G) to receive NTTs, as it doesnt run along QBL currently. However, the plan for the (G) to receive NTTs was due to the (L) shutdown, as the (G) would have gotten 480' (8-car) trains for the (C)/(J) to deal with the boost in ridership. As of right now, there isnt any plans for the (G) to get NTTs, but the assumption is when the R211s start arriving, the (G) will be getting the 480' trains that currently running on the (C).

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The IRT built Nevins St Lower Level as a provision for a Manhattan Bridge Connection and a Lafayette Ave line, where would the Lafayette Ave line have gone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Going to the Auto Show onboard 12PM at 5 Av, The (7) has a huge load from front to back. Now, it's crowded for a few things:


- Javits Center instead of the long walk or M34 wait

-State bus transportation

-Saving a seat instead of other Manhattan stops. 

Edited by Calvin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

If anything. Sutphin/Archer and Parsons/Archer need Redesigning. I go to Sutphin on a Regular Basis, and let me tell you that the station looks run down. Not as bad as other stations along the subway, but still bad regardless. Parsons/Archer is worse in terms of maintenance, but the dark atmosphere of the station makes it unique in a way that I can’t describe. 

I’ll propose something later in the Proposals thread related to Sutphin and Parsons Archer. 

Yet I still don't understand how water would've leaked into those stations in the first place. Same with the Second Avenue Subway and the Hudson Yards stations. I'm guessing it has to do with the unique and vulnerable geography of NYC, given that parts of it are close to water...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

If anything. Sutphin/Archer and Parsons/Archer need Redesigning. I go to Sutphin on a Regular Basis, and let me tell you that the station looks run down. Not as bad as other stations along the subway, but still bad regardless. Parsons/Archer is worse in terms of maintenance, but the dark atmosphere of the station makes it unique in a way that I can’t describe. 

I’ll propose something later in the Proposals thread related to Sutphin and Parsons Archer. 

My hot take is that Jamaica Van Wyck is the best looking station in the system. I challenge any of you to change my mind. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, R68OnBroadway said:

Why was the Bergen street area designed so poorly? Trains crawl through the junction; you can't cross between sides- sometimes I wonder if they intentionally designed it that way to keep Manhattan service on the express track and Crosstown on the local...

Knowing the way the IND was designed and built I would say this is most likely correct.

In my opinion, its the one thing they got wrong. In most other respects, the IND did a pretty good job future proofing itself, compared to the BMT and especially the IRT, which was clearly designed for the New York of 1904 not now. (The sheer complexity of the grade separated interlockings on the IND particularly West 4th, 59th and in the vicinity of 53rd and 6th are very impressive)  Of course if the Second System was built, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/24/2019 at 8:36 PM, Calvin said:

Non-tech trains are also getting the deep cleaning process: One set looks brand new on the (3)  with another one on the 42 St (S) with its repainted bonnets 

That’s good, Livonia usually cleans their cars anyway. I’m curious to see 240th Street’s cars deep cleaned; as they are the dirtiest R62A’s in the system. Side note; Westchester puts their cars through the car wash every night. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RR503 said:

My hot take is that Jamaica Van Wyck is the best looking station in the system. I challenge any of you to change my mind. 

If one were to convince TA to uncover the skylights and perhaps give the station some good TLC, then maybe Jamaica-Van Wyck could easily be the sleekest looking station in the system that wasn't built pre-1960s nor built in the last decade. Heck the Archer Av Subway stations could really use some good power washing to really bring out their as-new 70s/80s brutalist feel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Around the Horn said:

Knowing the way the IND was designed and built I would say this is most likely correct.

In my opinion, its the one thing they got wrong. In most other respects, the IND did a pretty good job future proofing itself, compared to the BMT and especially the IRT, which was clearly designed for the New York of 1904 not now. (The sheer complexity of the grade separated interlockings on the IND particularly West 4th, 59th and in the vicinity of 53rd and 6th are very impressive)  Of course if the Second System was built, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

This is exactly why I find the various arguments for deinterlining problematic. Aside from 8th Avenue and Fulton Street (the connection should be rather obvious), there aren't many notable instances of the IND failing to think ahead, whereas the IRT and BMT routinely failing to have produced issues like Rogers Junction, the (R), Chambers Street...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

The IRT built Nevins St Lower Level as a provision for a Manhattan Bridge Connection and a Lafayette Ave line, where would the Lafayette Ave line have gone?

Look at today’s (G) train route from Downtown Brooklyn for a general idea about Lafayette service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Lex said:

This is exactly why I find the various arguments for deinterlining problematic. Aside from 8th Avenue and Fulton Street (the connection should be rather obvious), there aren't many notable instances of the IND failing to think ahead, whereas the IRT and BMT routinely failing to have produced issues like Rogers Junction, the (R), Chambers Street...

Things change. New infrastructure gets built (think 63rd St), ridership dynamics shift, and sometimes bad decisions we made in different operational context just need to be revisited. That's the point of the whole exercise.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
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.