Jump to content

SUBWAY - Random Thoughts Topic


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Lex said:

They don't even have the excuse of the (A) serving different areas (at this point, the (C) is just a local (A) that short-turns on both ends).

This just plays into the psychological aspect of favoring express service, which is far more appropriate for trains serving the Rockaways (much greater distance to cover).

Would dwell times at Rockaway Blvd (A) incur a considerable impact during the AM rush?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 30.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
41 minutes ago, biGC323232 said:

How would you add the center track....There's no center track along that line..Unless u mean build one...

That's exactly it. The main impediment to any such installation is the need to move some of those buildings currently occupying the space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Spypenguin said:

Would dwell times at Rockaway Blvd (A) incur a considerable impact during the AM rush?

They could if people are foolish enough to transfer there for express service. (Not that there should be too many doing that in the first place, as the time difference between the (A) and (C) between Euclid Avenue and 59th Street is less than 10 minutes...)

I'm pretty sure we have unnecessarily long dwells at that station now because people aren't as observant as they need to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lex said:

That's exactly it. The main impediment to any such installation is the need to move some of those buildings currently occupying the space.

There exists space for a center track, just not platforms abutting a center track. It’d be like the Astoria line. 

(C) to Lefferts is a pretty demonstrable net benefit to Lefferts riders, but between the cost of operation and the “we don’t like change” resistance to everything in this city, will likely not happen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, biGC323232 said:

I wish the Livonia ave line had it that simple....I got 7 stations before a transfer to express service...What makes them so special....:lol:

That’s a bit of an apples to oranges comparison IMO. Riders coming from Lefferts would have to travel through two boroughs just to get to Manhattan, and the track geometry on the latter’s  line supports the service whereas the switches would need to be configured to give Livonia express service in Brooklyn.  would need to be reconfigured. 

There are six “express” intervals that run on the Livonia line every weekday though during the AM rush. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(C) to Lefferts, as much as I would like to see it happen, would only make sense in a situation where a connection is built from Montague to Fulton Local for an extended (W) and the (C) is bumped to the express.

Frankly IMO the (A) has no business going to Lefferts but going about resolving that is difficult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jchambers2120 said:

That’s a bit of an apples to oranges comparison IMO. Riders coming from Lefferts would have to travel through two boroughs just to get to Manhattan, and the track geometry on the latter’s  line supports the service whereas the switches would need to be configured to give Livonia express service in Brooklyn.  would need to be reconfigured. 

There are six “express” intervals that run on the Livonia line every weekday though during the AM rush. 

Not really....And lefferts blvd is real close to the city line of bklyn...only a few stops in queens not even 3/4 of the borough....Me personally if it was up to me i would have the (A) serve Rock PK all times except Late nights and Far Rkway all times...And have  the (C) from lefferts to 168 all times except late nights where i would run it as a shuttle to bway jct...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, biGC323232 said:

I wish the Livonia ave line had it that simple....I got 7 stations before a transfer to express service...What makes them so special....:lol:

So you’re suggesting that the (3) should be cut back to Utica and the (4) stretch all the way out to/from New Lots full-time?

The current track layout where the express tracks end at bumper blocks east of Utica and the local tracks feeding onto the New Lots Branch says otherwise...on top of that, the (4) already has its own yard home at Jerome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jemorie said:

So you’re suggesting that the (3) should be cut back to Utica and the (4) stretch all the way out to/from New Lots full-time?

The current track layout where the express tracks end at bumper blocks east of Utica and the local tracks feeding onto the New Lots Branch says otherwise...on top of that, the (4) already has its own yard home at Jerome.

I wish... But i was being sarcastic about the fact that lefferts can have they way in that regards but other lines thats  similar cant...It's hard to do it like that cause the express tracks feeds into the utica from joralmon tunnel...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, biGC323232 said:

I wish... But i was being sarcastic about the fact that lefferts can have they way in that regards but other lines thats  similar cant...It's hard to do it like that cause the express tracks feeds into the utica from joralmon tunnel...

You wish? That could only be accomplished once the R62/62As’ future replacement models come into play, only then can the (3) and (4) swap cars at New Lots without a problem. In addition, the (3) still has to run to/from New Lots at all times except nights since the local tracks come from the west side branch, through Eastern Parkway, and feed onto the New Lots Branch anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jemorie said:

You wish? That could only be accomplished once the R62/62As’ future replacement models come into play, only then can the (3) and (4) swap cars at New Lots without a problem. In addition, the (3) still has to run to/from New Lots at all times except nights since the local tracks come from the west side branch, through Eastern Parkway, and feed onto the New Lots Branch anyway.

I Know all that..Thats why i said i wish...-_-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, biGC323232 said:

How would you add the center track....There's no center track along that line..Unless u mean build one...

The line was built for space for a center track. The only portion constructed is at Junius. The other sections are not used or have buildings on them that could be moved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Union Tpke said:

If you really wanted to you could add the center track on the Livonia El. It would be a waste, and would only benefit New Lots Avenue, but could be useful for train storage and for service changes.

I highly doubt that anyone would consider storing trains on a center track between New Lots and the portal to Utica 😀. Perhaps using it for service changes has some merit but the costs associated with interlocking(s) at New Lots, Junius St, and the portal to Utica would garner an inevitable resounding no vote from Signals and Track departments. I can almost guarantee that . The obvious nonstarter is that whom would benefit from such an expenditure besides people going to an from New Lots station itself ? I realize the poster was being rhetorical with the question but it amazed me that anyone would really consider the idea as a realistic one and make plans for it. Your take and that of my RTO buddy who mentioned the "express" intervals somewhat restored my faith in posters in general. Thank you. Carry on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Trainmaster5 said:

The obvious nonstarter is that whom would benefit from such an expenditure besides people going to an from New Lots station itself ?

Almost no one. And the (3) and (4)'s current service design at the Brooklyn end should remain the way they are now. Period. The Lenox Yard does not have a shop for maintaining and inspecting trains anyway. That's where Livonia Yard comes into play.

This is the #1 reason why the (3) goes to/from New Lots at all times except nights and early Sunday mornings, while the (4) is cut back to Utica.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/13/2019 at 6:35 PM, Trainmaster5 said:

I highly doubt that anyone would consider storing trains on a center track between New Lots and the portal to Utica 😀. Perhaps using it for service changes has some merit but the costs associated with interlocking(s) at New Lots, Junius St, and the portal to Utica would garner an inevitable resounding no vote from Signals and Track departments. I can almost guarantee that . The obvious nonstarter is that whom would benefit from such an expenditure besides people going to an from New Lots station itself ? I realize the poster was being rhetorical with the question but it amazed me that anyone would really consider the idea as a realistic one and make plans for it. Your take and that of my RTO buddy who mentioned the "express" intervals somewhat restored my faith in posters in general. Thank you. Carry on.

The crazy thing is that in 1951, the NYCBOT studied this! I have been doing a lot of research on the IRT New Lots Line of late.

https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1951/03/02/82094296.pdf

Also, the track was going to be put in for storage, but do to high cost and technicalities, wasn't. Here is what I recently added to the wikipedia article:

Quote

On April 16, 1916, the New York State Public Service Commission (PSC) denied a request by the Chief Engineer of the IRT for the installation of a third track on the line to provide necessary space for train storage. The request was turned down because it would have required the acquisition of additional steel and because the legal routing of Route 31 did not specify the construction of a third track along the line.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Yankees4life said:

The <F> is coming soon but I do wonder why there has been no plans to add a <R> or <N>?

The <F> is here! I think that an (W) extension would be better -- it would run express along 4th Av, then down to Bay Ridge, ad an express (R).

Edited by Jova42R
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Union Tpke said:

The crazy thing is that in 1951, the NYCBOT studied this! I have been doing a lot of research on the IRT New Lots Line of late.

https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1951/03/02/82094296.pdf

Also, the track was going to be put in for storage, but do to high cost and technicalities, wasn't. Here is what I recently added to the wikipedia article:

 

Long before tagging trains became an issue. That’s what I was getting at. I actually lived near the line when Lo-Vs were the mainstay. Heck I frequently went to Fortunoff’s stores on Livonia by Pennsylvania Avenue. Mid Fifties -‘60. Saw the (2) to Dyre appear and watched the last part of the Van Dyke and the whole  Tilden houses being built. Swam at Betsey Head pool. Even then there was no graffiti on the trains. I think it was 20-25 years before the practice started and transit realized that storing equipment on the structure was a losing proposition 😁. Thanks for the post. Brings back some memories I’d kind of forgotten. Carry on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Union Tpke said:

The crazy thing is that in 1951, the NYCBOT studied this! I have been doing a lot of research on the IRT New Lots Line of late.

https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1951/03/02/82094296.pdf

Also, the track was going to be put in for storage, but do to high cost and technicalities, wasn't. Here is what I recently added to the wikipedia article:

 

Wow. They also studied a third track for the Jamaica line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, paulrivera said:

I have no data to back this up except the good ol' "seeing eye test", but I've noticed an uptick in homeless people along the (4) line in the Bronx.

What I find interesting is I haven't seen this uptick along the (D) line, which goes underground and serves more or less the same neighborhoods 3 blocks away.

It’s not just on the (4), it’s all over the system. Within a week of an brand new R179 hitting the A line a few weeks ago, one of the cars was already stunk out by some homeless people. It’s terrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Cabanamaner said:

It’s not just on the (4), it’s all over the system. Within a week of an brand new R179 hitting the A line a few weeks ago, one of the cars was already stunk out by some homeless people. It’s terrible.

 

15 hours ago, paulrivera said:

I have no data to back this up except the good ol' "seeing eye test", but I've noticed an uptick in homeless people along the (4) line in the Bronx.

What I find interesting is I haven't seen this uptick along the (D) line, which goes underground and serves more or less the same neighborhoods 3 blocks away.

Word up..Its gotten to the point where i cant even ride 6-7 stops regardless of the line without homeless begging for money or simply getting on and forcing everyone to another car...Sometimes ill give a few dollars but dam i cant help them all

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.