SUBWAY - Random Thoughts Topic

[trainfan22]

Ridership was pretty good today despite it being Thanksgiving. And I rode around the system long after the parade ended. A lot of SRO trains too, their was even a showtime dance crew on the train lol.

[Trainmaster5]

13 hours ago, RR503 said:

System safety signs off on all the speed increases — this isn’t something happing via an obfuscated chain of command. While I understand that there are some areas that are, shall we say, fun-prone, I don’t think that sign compliant operation actually feels all that rough. Remember, the point of the sign effort is to find areas where limits are set below NYCT standards, which dictate a maximum of 4 inches of unbalanced force around curves — or, frankly, not all that much. As far as I can tell, areas such as Nevins on tracks 3 and 4 and GC on 4 suffer not so much from overly aggressive sign speeds as they do from operation that either exceeds sign when rounding the curve or resuming speed before the R sign. All of which is to say I think you’d be fine if you increase and just stay within delineated bounds.

I'm gonna agree with your point about system safety but I seem to remember that same group of people responding to safety problems instead of being pro-active when they should have been.  IIRC it took an outside Federal agency to point out longstanding signal deficiencies in the subway system.  Just something that shouldn't be overlooked when attesting to the professional qualities of the system safety department. The MTA has always been a reactive agency IMO, whether it's the subways,  buses or the railroads we're discussing.  A prime example of the CYA mindset.  Just my opinion.  Carry on. 

[Around the Horn]

16 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

There have been WAY to many 12-9's the past week. Is there no way to prevent these tragedies?

Suicides, like homeless people, are something that will persist in the subway until the issues in our overall society that cause it are properly addressed.

[Maxwell179]

16 hours ago, CenSin said:

Since platform doors are out of the question…

• Additional platform conductors with some doing double duty as spotters looking for drunk commuters
• Well-supported mental health care institutions and proactive screening of patients at their annual physicals to make sure that they get the services they need instead of slipping through the cracks and into the tracks
• Assisted suicide for those who really want to die and has his/her mind made up
  • Torture for those whose goals are to die and screw up everyone’s commute in the process—can’t let these bastards log out of life the easy way

huh

[bwwnyc123]

Suicidal situations is a serious issue. We don't know what other people are going through in their lives. Sometimes it is hard to know when someone is going to kill themselves and they usually wait and jump right in front of the trains path as it comes into the station. That really is a tough situation.

Edited November 29, 2019 by bwwnyc123

[Trainmaster5]

Perhaps the rise of homelessness has contributed to the numberof incidents but in RTO the period of Thanksgiving to New Years was always considered 12-9 time. We chalked it up to depression. Family situation, economic problems and the like are triggers that most of us probably can’t comprehend. To add to the numbers we have the addiction  problem where the 12-9 might be accidental.Throw in the subway surfers whom deserve their demise in my opinion. Just my observations. Carry on.

[RR503]

22 hours ago, Trainmaster5 said:

I'm gonna agree with your point about system safety but I seem to remember that same group of people responding to safety problems instead of being pro-active when they should have been.  IIRC it took an outside Federal agency to point out longstanding signal deficiencies in the subway system.  Just something that shouldn't be overlooked when attesting to the professional qualities of the system safety department. The MTA has always been a reactive agency IMO, whether it's the subways,  buses or the railroads we're discussing.  A prime example of the CYA mindset.  Just my opinion.  Carry on. 

The events leading up to the Williamsburg Bridge crash were a bit more murky than just negligence. OSS had been pushing DCE since '91 to look carefully at the emergency brake systems, and in fact had put together a course of remedial action to increase cylinder pressures as early as '93. Somewhere between the top of DCE and the actual implementation end of things (ie the pneumatic shops), the memo had got lost -- no timetable for cylinder pressure increases had been set, and the people on the front lines didn't even know the mods were in the work order pipeline. On the signal deficiencies end, the IG report puts April of '93 as being the earliest that NYCT could have been fully aware of control line deficiencies in the signal system thanks to a fender-bender at 103/CPW, the receipt of the TTCL report on Lex's signal system in March (a follow-up on the USQ derailment in '91), and an internal analysis using braking curves from the slow-stopping cars that had been tested over at DCE at the time. And then there was, of course, the infamous PB report on the signal system, a summary of whose data I've excerpted below (from a board presentation post-WillyB h/t @Stephen Bauman)

All of this IMO would seem to indicate a breakdown of communication in DCE and Signals, which to some degree may be indicative of OSS not pushing hard enough, but it's my impression that OSS didn't have nearly the internal pull that it gained after the collision. The agency is absolutely reactive, but its brand of reactivity has changed over the years -- before '95, it was piecemeal effort on safety, after '95 it was an all out safety blitz, and now, after having value engineered and disciplined the system to within an inch of its life, it's whatever you'd call this managerial dynamic. 

Edited November 30, 2019 by RR503

[brakethrow]

On 11/27/2019 at 8:26 PM, Trainmaster5 said:

That’s part of the reason why I responded the way I did. There was never a timer leaving Nevins on either track. We were taught by our instructors that the reasoning was twofold . One was that the C/R and any passengers riding the rear section of the train were not to be whipped around any curves where they might lose their balance or their seats. That was an instant write up. The second reason I learned from working with the track department. Excessive force on the outer rail was a constant worry and Car Equipment was concerned about the wheel flanges. Early in my career I witnessed a fist fight in the parking lot at East 180th St because a C/R took exception to being thrown around at Nevins and the curve at Astor Place. Back then the consensus was that the conductor was justified. Times change. Carry on.

I have to start riding in the last car to see how severe it is ripping through Astor Pl on the express tracks n/b.

Sometimes you can see the "I'm tired and just want to get home" look on some of the t/o's faces..slight slouch with their heads tilted to the side..

Slightly off topic but I noticed the 142As are a little more stable and quieter when going through curves at speed compared to the 142s.

[CenSin]

11 hours ago, RR503 said:

Wow! 158 signal locations on the West End versus 81 on Sea Beach. That would explain the speed difference between the two lines.

[RR503]

19 minutes ago, CenSin said:

Wow! 158 signal locations on the West End versus 81 on Sea Beach. That would explain the speed difference between the two lines.

These charts are pre-resignalling; the speed differences you observe are enforced by agency efforts to respond to these issues (though WE certainly is a more GT-heavy route than SB, for obvious reasons).

[RR503]

1 hour ago, brakethrow said:

I have to start riding in the last car to see how severe it is ripping through Astor Pl on the express tracks n/b.

Sometimes you can see the "I'm tired and just want to get home" look on some of the t/o's faces..slight slouch with their heads tilted to the side..

Slightly off topic but I noticed the 142As are a little more stable and quieter when going through curves at speed compared to the 142s.

My experience would seem to indicate that Astor is generally okay. Operators generally enter that curve having taken a slight brake application as the signals beyond the curve are closely spaced and frequently are restrictive. 

[RR503]

A question for the old timers here (looking at you @Trainmaster5) : have President St or Church Ave on Nostrand ever been used for GO operation as a terminal? Maybe during one of the flooding projects for Flatbush/Brooklyn College? Is there anything that would stop their use today? 

(also @mods could you perhaps merge my three replies to myself? Poor organization -- sorry)

Edited November 30, 2019 by RR503

[Trainmaster5]

3 hours ago, RR503 said:

A question for the old timers here (looking at you @Trainmaster5) : have President St or Church Ave on Nostrand ever been used for GO operation as a terminal? Maybe during one of the flooding projects for Flatbush/Brooklyn College? Is there anything that would stop their use today? 

(also @mods could you perhaps merge my three replies to myself? Poor organization -- sorry)

President St was used more frequently than Church Avenue in my experience, especially up until the mid nineties or so. There's a functioning tower at the south end of the station beyond the platform and a crossover located just beyond that. Trains would relay just north of Sterling St for n/b service. Power could then be removed on the s/b track from Sterling to Church or all the way into Flatbush if need be. I don't recall Church Avenue being used as a terminal on a regular G.O. but it was possible to use it in an emergency situation. Once again the tower is located at the south end of the station just past the platform end. The President St G.O.'s were gradually moved over to Utica Avenue because it was more convenient operationally. Run shuttle buses from Franklin s/b on Nostrand and n/b on New York Avenues to and from Flatbush. It also eliminates the need for a shuttle train crews, dispatcher(s) and a dedicated tower operator for the G.O.. It's easier to have Utica tower to have full control of the situation. That's my recollection. Carry on.

[RR503]

2 hours ago, Trainmaster5 said:

President St was used more frequently than Church Avenue in my experience, especially up until the mid nineties or so. There's a functioning tower at the south end of the station beyond the platform and a crossover located just beyond that. Trains would relay just north of Sterling St for n/b service. Power could then be removed on the s/b track from Sterling to Church or all the way into Flatbush if need be. I don't recall Church Avenue being used as a terminal on a regular G.O. but it was possible to use it in an emergency situation. Once again the tower is located at the south end of the station just past the platform end. The President St G.O.'s were gradually moved over to Utica Avenue because it was more convenient operationally. Run shuttle buses from Franklin s/b on Nostrand and n/b on New York Avenues to and from Flatbush. It also eliminates the need for a shuttle train crews, dispatcher(s) and a dedicated tower operator for the G.O.. It's easier to have Utica tower to have full control of the situation. That's my recollection. Carry on.

This is fascinating, thanks much. Am curious as to what you mean by shuttle train crews -- was the President op something that ran via shuttle from Franklin or as the end of the ? Or do you mean the dead time necessitated by relay+back-riding to a recrew at Atlantic (does Franklin have a crew room?). Also, how exactly do the power blocks in that area work -- ie can I turn a train at Church or President but still have power off on both tracks down to Flatbush. 

[CenSin]

via Cranberry Street tunnel…

Sucks for the being held in the tunnel. There was an opportunity for a cross-platform transfer if the signals were configured to allow both trains into the station, but the crawled right past, made the stop at Canal Street, be and then pulled out without the even starting to creep into the station.

[bwwnyc123]

That's the same thing they do with whenever they want to leave Canal before .

Edited December 1, 2019 by bwwnyc123

[CenSin]

1 hour ago, bwwnyc123 said:

That's the same thing they do with whenever they want to leave Canal before .

Funny thing was… that wasn’t even there at Spring Street. It just waited until the caught up with it from West 4 Street–Washington Square.

[paulrivera]

On 11/28/2019 at 5:26 PM, Lawrence St said:

I've noticed that on some weekends and offpeak weekdays, uptown trains will arrive on the middle track at 149th St-GC using the 138th St bypass track, and during rush hour and peak times, trains will arrive on the uptown local track at 149th St-GC bypassing 138th St on the regular uptown local.

Yesterday I rode the  uptown during the midday and it went up the middle thru 138, but went to the local track right after and pulled into 149th normally.

2 hours ago, bwwnyc123 said:

That's the same thing they do with whenever they want to leave Canal before .

And also if a  from the Bronx is pulling out of 155th Street after the  on the middle track gets the lineup at 145. The will get held by red signal just outside 145 as the crosses over.

[Jemorie]

I heard the Grand Concourse corridor was suppose to be four tracks, but then some lawsuit from the IRT company prevented that from ever happening.

[Trainmaster5]

7 hours ago, RR503 said:

This is fascinating, thanks much. Am curious as to what you mean by shuttle train crews -- was the President op something that ran via shuttle from Franklin or as the end of the ? Or do you mean the dead time necessitated by relay+back-riding to a recrew at Atlantic (does Franklin have a crew room?). Also, how exactly do the power blocks in that area work -- ie can I turn a train at Church or President but still have power off on both tracks down to Flatbush. 

The shuttle job started at Flatbush about midnight and just ran back and forth between there and President St. There was also another M/M and C/R who gave relief to the operating crew.  For a shuttle to terminate at Franklin,  from Flatbush, it becomes problematic.  You would either have to enter Franklin n/b on the express ,  discharge,  relay at Atlantic,  in and out of Nevins spur, and return to Franklin on the Express for service to Flatbush. Option #2 would be via Franklin local, relay at Brooklyn Museum, and return to Franklin on the local for Flatbush service.  Option #3 which is really tough would have the Flatbush shuttle wrong rail between Franklin Avenue and President St..  Wrong railing in that manner hasn't been used in passenger service but the general move has been used weekday mornings going back to the early eighties at least. That's the shortcut that the first two trains get to Flatbush from Livonia Yard daily. 

As for the 3rd rail question. Power limits are from north of Sterling to Church,  IIRC,  Beverly to Flatbush station although I don't remember exactly what point south of Church. Those pre-Redbird cars would show where when the lights would flicker as you passed the gaps. When the R142 cars were put in service on the line the power situation became a problem south of Church Avenue.  ConEd has a substation on Nostrand Avenue down there around Newkirk Avenue. The practice was that the substation would shed it's excess power down into the subway. The computerized cars would sense an overload and shut.  Bombardier and later Car Equipment had to have personnel assigned to Flatbush to reboot each dead consist to get service running again. I think that might help answer your question about turning a train or two at Church Avenue. I used to feel sorry for the people who were supposed to finish at The Busn after making their assigned two trips and instead got turned back to 241st  St or maybe being saved by the dispatcher at East 180th street. Franklin Avenue has a crew quarters but it belongs to signal or track.  South of the station behind the ATD office between 1 and 2 tracks. 

  Just my recollections. Carry on. 

Edited December 1, 2019 by Trainmaster5
Additional information

[bobtehpanda]

1 hour ago, Jemorie said:

I heard the Grand Concourse corridor was suppose to be four tracks, but then some lawsuit from the IRT company prevented that from ever happening.

I don't know if it was a lawsuit. I believe The Routes Not Taken chalked it up to the escalating costs of the IND, which were already increasing after initial plans had come out and before construction had happened.

Similar story is why the is a two-track line. The plan at one point was for four.

[Jemorie]

9 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

I don't know if it was a lawsuit. I believe The Routes Not Taken chalked it up to the escalating costs of the IND, which were already increasing after initial plans had come out and before construction had happened.

Similar story is why the is a two-track line. The plan at one point was for four.

I see. I think that anything money-related is more reasonable than the excuse of “all the other subways in the Bronx are three tracks only, why should Grand Concourse get special treatment with four-tracks”.

Lol. Btw, the  already experience some delays today, mainly due to the  turning at 145 Lower in the middle. This is another reason why Grand Concourse should have been four-tracks, so that today’s  service can run to/from  Bedford Park Blvd all day and evening while the  remains express.

[Calvin]

Outside Hudson Yards on the  , this was the first day that the area had hail but, not much salt on the walkways around the Vessel. 

[CenSin]

On 12/1/2019 at 11:10 AM, Jemorie said:

Lol. Btw, the  already experience some delays today, mainly due to the  turning at 145 Lower in the middle. This is another reason why Grand Concourse should have been four-tracks, so that today’s  service can run to/from  Bedford Park Blvd all day and evening while the  remains express.

This is another reason why the MTA shouldn’t be using infrastructure in ways not intended. Even with 4 tracks, there would be the same problem— trains terminating at 145 Street. 145 Street is not supposed to be a terminal. Bedford Park Boulevard and 168 Street are designed to terminate trains. The obvious solution is to terminate trains only at Bedford Park Boulevard, which the MTA is too poor to do.

[CenSin]

A lot of trainees on the leaving Coney Island at 8:03 AM…