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.
Sign in to follow this  
'89 Liberty MCI

(B)(Q) vs. (2)(5) Delays and Crowding in Brooklyn

Recommended Posts

From a previous message:

 

"Why is is that manhattan bound trains (2's or 3's) tend to accelerate through the curve after nevins, but creep through the curve after park pl."

 

Picture a four track line that curves at almost a 90-degree angle. The outer-most track - in this case the Manhattan-bound #2 and #3 track will have the easiest most broad path to follow. The trains can almost travel at a good speed. While the inner most outside track will have the short amount of space to turn - the Brooklyn-bound #2 and #3 track - thus trains will have to slow down.

 

An example of this is every-day practice - the curve between Hoyt Street and Nevins - is almost not noticeable in the Manhattan bound directions for the #2 and #3 trains, and a bit notice-able on the Manhattan-bound #4 and #5 trains. However the Brooklyn-bound sides of the #2, #3, #4 and #5 trains must slow down or almost crawl into the Nevins Street station after leaving Hoyt Street. One can also hear the squeel of the train's wheels while entering the station.

 

The curves at Park Place are about equal for both directions, and I believe any speed restrictions.

 

Mike

 

Good point... you do have less leeway in an inner lane than you do, the outer...

Simple geometrics is a plausible explanation....

 

Thanks, writer guy :cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please note that at Canal Street for the current N and Q express trains traveling to the Manhattan, the curve at Canal Street is at the end of a down-grade. There are several places in the system where the TA WANTS trains traveling on a down-grade to slow down, compared to their up-grade traveling sister track.

 

One example of this is at the section from the Whitlock Avenue station to Hunts Point on the #6 line in the Bronx. There the downtown #6 trains are traveling on a down-grade to get under-ground, while the uptown side is emerging from the subway to an elevated track. The downtown trains (both local and center track express) SLOW DOWN as the travel proceeds underground. I believe that there are speed restrictions in place (timer signals, etc). The uptown trains however travel at a good rate of speed emerging from underground to reach the elevated structure.

 

I believe that there are other examples of speed restrictions on down-grades in the subway system.

 

Mike

 

Oh, so I guess the Uptown track at Canal St is an "up-grade".

 

I'm assuming a "down-grade" is when, trains start to descend, & "up-grade" is when trains ascend?

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, thanks!

 

Thanks, writer guy :cool:

 

Writer guy, LOL! :tup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uptown (N)(Q)s get the downgrade since they just came off the bridge. Brooklyn-bound (N)(Q)s get the upgrade since they are getting on the bridge.

 

How long does a (2) or (5) usually take to get from Church or Sterling to Franklin during the AM rush? I really want to know how long it takes to get from Flatbush to Franklin and how much time a (2) or (5) spends idle due to train traffic ahead (leading up to Franklin, coming from Flatbush). I specify Church and Sterling since those are the stations you two guys use and delays due to train traffic are less likely to occur the further away you are from Rogers junction.

 

The other day I took a (2) from Flatbush to President at about 18:30 (!). I wanted to go to Manhattan, but the train stalled at President for at least 5 minutes. A (5) caught up and was sitting right behind us in the tunnel. I looked out the train and saw a red signal at the north end of the platform and finally decided to exit the station, walk to Nostrand Avenue-Eastern Parkway, and take the (3), which showed up as soon as I got there. When I got off the (3) at 135 Street-Lenox Avenue the same (2) that I had abandoned at President Street showed up.

 

You got me if this sort of thing happens in the AM rush; I thought this was really out of the ordinary and maybe happened because of a stalled (3) at Franklin or some kind of emergency. The (1) was not running past 215 Street-10 Avenue because the Broadway Bridge was up, so I am wondering if they held the (2) back to let a (3) go directly in front so that the (2) would not get killed going to the Bronx (because perhaps a good number of people took the (2)(3) instead of the (1)). The (3) picked up a lot of people and did not empty out until it got over to Lenox.

Edited by '89 Liberty MCI
More information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Uptown (N)(Q)s get the downgrade since they just came off the bridge. Brooklyn-bound (N)(Q)s get the upgrade since they are getting on the bridge.

 

Ok, thanks!

 

How long does a (2) or (5) usually take to get from Church or Sterling to Franklin during the AM rush? I really want to know how long it takes to get from Flatbush to Franklin and how much time a (2) or (5) spends idle due to train traffic ahead (leading up to Franklin, coming from Flatbush). I specify Church and Sterling since those are the stations you two guys use and delays due to train traffic are less likely to occur the further away you are from Rogers junction.

 

During the AM, being stalled at President St is not rare at all. So it takes me about a good 6-8 minutes, maybe even more, to get from Sterling St to Franklin Ave.

 

The other day I took a (2) from Flatbush to President at about 18:30 (!). I wanted to go to Manhattan, but the train stalled at President for at least 5 minutes. A (5) caught up and was sitting right behind us in the tunnel. I looked out the train and saw a red signal at the north end of the platform and finally decided to exit the station, walk to Nostrand Avenue-Eastern Parkway, and take the (3), which showed up as soon as I got there. When I got off the (3) at 135 Street-Lenox Avenue the same (2) that I had abandoned at President Street showed up.

 

Something stinks like a dead rat! Why did the (2) have to be stalled for that long? especially when you went to Nostrand Ave, caught a (3) then took it to 135 st & saw that same (2) come in shortly. Something is wrong!

 

The Nostrand Ave line get's treated like shit, compared to it's Eastern Pkwy/Livonia counterpart!

 

So I am wondering if they held the (2) back to let a (3) go directly in front so that the (2) would not get killed going to the Bronx.

 

What do you mean "killed going to the Bronx"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said the Broadway Bridge was up on the (1) line. If the Broadway Bridge is up (because of a passing ship, and I think it actually got stuck in the up position or something), then the people that want points north of 215 Street-10 Avenue have no way of getting over the bridge on foot, by bus (the Bx7), by car, or by train (the (1)).

 

The (2) gets very crowded going into the Bronx during the PM rush. That thing is SRO going up that way at that time. By getting killed I mean getting very very crowded. I really got it from DOB because a lot of bus operators say they are getting "killed/murdered/hammered/smashed/bombed/swamped" when they pick up a lot of people. I doubt B/Os are the only people that use it though. Although they and other DOB employees may use it more than RTO employees. Not like it has to be restricted to DOB.

 

Now that you understand where I am coming from, I can tell you that the (2) gets killed going to the Bronx even when everything is running normal. When I said that the (2) would not get killed going to the Bronx I meant to say it would not get killed as much, with the (3) right in front of it to pick up people that normally ride the (1), but avoided the (1) due to the bridge being up.

 

Now, they also could have taken the (1) to 181 Street-St. Nicholas Avenue or 207 Street-10 Avenue and taken a bus across the bridge and then another bus or two to the northwest Bronx, but that would not be a very good idea due to the fact that the 181 Street and 207 Street bridges often have a lot of traffic and probably had much worse traffic since the Broadway bridge was up. People probably did this anyway. There were also delays on the (1) due to the Broadway bridge problem, so the (3) functions as an alternative from that standpoint, for people who live in Manhattan. Add up the delays on the (1) and people trying to cram themselves into the (1) and you get (1)s that have practically no room.

 

Also the (2)(3) is a reasonable alternative to the (1) for those who live in Hamilton Heights, since they can take the (3) as far as 145 Street and then take a crosstown bus or walk. But of course the (3) is just going to 148 Street, so it can take on the extra crowding more easily than the (2), which is going through the whole Bronx and is already carrying masses of people. They sent the (3) first to take care of the regular (1) riders that live in Manhattan, then the (2) to take care of anybody that wants to go to the Bronx without dealing with the bridges (181, 207). If the (2) had gone before the (3) it would have been really messy because the people getting off within Manhattan would have jammed themselves into the (2), which would have been insanely crowded since the (1) had a problem and the (3) I was on was filled to capacity, and the (2) has to go through the whole Bronx to boot.

 

By the way the (2) helps people get to the west Bronx in this emergency situation by connecting to the (4) at 149 Street-Grand Concourse. Sorry I did not make that clear before. The (4) then connects to a crosstown bus (Bx9, Bx1/2, Bx10).

 

I might be confusing, but to clarify and summarize, here it is in a nutshell: The (1) had a problem and was more crowded than usual. Some (1) riders went to the (2)(3) due to the bridge being up and the announcements that said this. Sending the (2) first would have been a disaster since the (2) has to go through the whole Bronx while the (3) just has to go to 148. Dwell times at each station would have been longer since people would have been trying to stuff themselves into the (2), which was and always is more crowded than the (3) since it travels a much longer distance and serves more areas than the (3) after 135 Street.

 

Also they figured they could get away with holding the (2) for so long at President because it was an emergency situation (problem with the (1)) and they figured it does not really matter how slow the (2) is leaving Brooklyn during the PM rush since fewer people want to travel from Brooklyn to Manhattan than from Manhattan to the Bronx at that time.

 

I did not think the delays at President were rare at all. I just thought the (2) being stalled at President for that amount of time was rare.

Edited by '89 Liberty MCI
Last sentence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not know if this was suggested before, but how possible would it be to lay down just one extra track and two switches between Sterling Street and Rogers junction? This is as modest a proposal as I can think of.

 

The track and two switches would normally be used only by Manhattan-bound (5) trains. This is how it goes: The first switch would be located just north of Sterling Street. The second switch would be located somewhere on the Manhattan-bound Eastern Parkway express track, east of Franklin Avenue. So it would be: Stop at Sterling Street, punch (5) on the new route selector at Sterling, then take switch #1 to new track, then take switch #2 to existing Manhattan-bound EP express track. (2) T/Os would punch (2) on the route selector and just go through like now. Now the Manhattan-bound (5)s do not have to wait for the (3)s to pass, just the (4)s.

 

Reason why I suggest that the new switch be at Sterling rather than President, is that there would be more room to build this whole thing with the greater distance from Rogers junction to Sterling than from Rogers junction to President. Also it might make it easier to synchronize the (4)s and (5)s due to the greater distance from Sterling to Rogers junction than from President to Rogers junction (which would then be closer to the distance from Rogers junction [or actually wherever the new (4)(5) merge point at switch #2 would be] to Utica Avenue).

 

All or most Manhattan-bound (5)s would then skip President during AM rush hours. Other times I guess most of them would stop at President. Or whatever.

 

Pipe dream that would require construction that would raise hell on the surface roads and cost lots of money and red tape? Or plausible solution that could actually be carried out with minimal disruption on the surface roads?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be a deep bore situation (as supposed to a cut and cover) being that Manhattan bound is already on the LL leaving Nostrand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do not know if this was suggested before, but how possible would it be to lay down just one extra track and two switches between Sterling Street and Rogers junction? This is as modest a proposal as I can think of.

 

The track and two switches would normally be used only by Manhattan-bound (5) trains. This is how it goes: The first switch would be located just north of Sterling Street. The second switch would be located somewhere on the Manhattan-bound Eastern Parkway express track, east of Franklin Avenue. So it would be: Stop at Sterling Street, punch (5) on the new route selector at Sterling, then take switch #1 to new track, then take switch #2 to existing Manhattan-bound EP express track. (2) T/Os would punch (2) on the route selector and just go through like now. Now the Manhattan-bound (5)s do not have to wait for the (3)s to pass, just the (4)s.

 

Reason why I suggest that the new switch be at Sterling rather than President, is that there would be more room to build this whole thing with the greater distance from Rogers junction to Sterling than from Rogers junction to President. Also it might make it easier to synchronize the (4)s and (5)s due to the greater distance from Sterling to Rogers junction than from President to Rogers junction (which would then be closer to the distance from Rogers junction [or actually wherever the new (4)(5) merge point at switch #2 would be] to Utica Avenue).

 

All or most Manhattan-bound (5)s would then skip President during AM rush hours. Other times I guess most of them would stop at President. Or whatever.

 

Pipe dream that would require construction that would raise hell on the surface roads and cost lots of money and red tape? Or plausible solution that could actually be carried out with minimal disruption on the surface roads?

Nostrand Avenue is quite narrow. If anything was done to the Rogers Avenue junction, I think it'd be along Eastern Parkway. There's enough width (that didn't exist when the junction was first built) along Eastern Parkway to be creative with the changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How long does a (2) or (5) usually take to get from Church or Sterling to Franklin during the AM rush? I really want to know how long it takes to get from Flatbush to Franklin and how much time a (2) or (5) spends idle due to train traffic ahead (leading up to Franklin, coming from Flatbush). I specify Church and Sterling since those are the stations you two guys use and delays due to train traffic are less likely to occur the further away you are from Rogers junction.

 

about 2 mins at church... 2 at winthrop, 1 at sterling, [2-3 (normally), 5-8 (if there's a hangup)] at president, and 2 mins to get to franklin from president....

 

so yeh, about 10 minutes (from church).... which is sad, considering that it's supposed to take 10 mins to get from flatbush to franklin! On average, there is no way in hell during the AM rush that a train takes 10 mins to get to franklin from the (f'bush) junction....

 

 

The (1) was not running past 215 Street-10 Avenue because the Broadway Bridge was up, so I am wondering if they held the (2) back to let a (3) go directly in front so that the (2) would not get killed going to the Bronx (because perhaps a good number of people took the (2)(3) instead of the (1)). The (3) picked up a lot of people and did not empty out until it got over to Lenox.

this past friday, I was on a (1) out of 242nd (that left 7 mins late) that crossed the bridge... it was coasting along like normal, until we got to 116th - where it stayed for a whopping 16 mins.... then you hear the announcement, ladies & gentlemen, this train is OOS....

 

since it was delayed, I was tryna stick it out to 96th so I can catch the (2).... what I wanted to do that day though, was to ride it to 59th so I can catch the (:)....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do not know if this was suggested before, but how possible would it be to lay down just one extra track and two switches between Sterling Street and Rogers junction? This is as modest a proposal as I can think of.

 

The track and two switches would normally be used only by Manhattan-bound (5) trains. This is how it goes: The first switch would be located just north of Sterling Street. The second switch would be located somewhere on the Manhattan-bound Eastern Parkway express track, east of Franklin Avenue. So it would be: Stop at Sterling Street, punch (5) on the new route selector at Sterling, then take switch #1 to new track, then take switch #2 to existing Manhattan-bound EP express track. (2) T/Os would punch (2) on the route selector and just go through like now. Now the Manhattan-bound (5)s do not have to wait for the (3)s to pass, just the (4)s.

 

Reason why I suggest that the new switch be at Sterling rather than President, is that there would be more room to build this whole thing with the greater distance from Rogers junction to Sterling than from Rogers junction to President. Also it might make it easier to synchronize the (4)s and (5)s due to the greater distance from Sterling to Rogers junction than from President to Rogers junction (which would then be closer to the distance from Rogers junction [or actually wherever the new (4)(5) merge point at switch #2 would be] to Utica Avenue).

 

All or most Manhattan-bound (5)s would then skip President during AM rush hours. Other times I guess most of them would stop at President. Or whatever.

 

Pipe dream that would require construction that would raise hell on the surface roads and cost lots of money and red tape? Or plausible solution that could actually be carried out with minimal disruption on the surface roads?

 

Yes, finally, someone agrees with me! :cool:

 

However, I think skipping President is a little too much, even if ridership is not the greatest over there ;)

 

I think though, the (2) & (5) should have something a little more like this.

 

What I'm thinking of is, it would require a lot of reconstruction, but have east of Franklin Ave the 2 tracks split apart, then the local track & express track will feed into the middle, creating the Nostrand Ave track & then it will turn down Nostrand Ave, making President St more like, Nostrand, Kingston & Utica Aves, stacked.

 

 

And visa versa for northbound trains. They'll just raise from under, yet in between, the eastern parkway tracks & then the (2) will merge left with the (3) & the (5) would merge to the right with the (4).

 

Please let me know if you understand what I'm saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, finally, someone agrees with me! :cool:

 

However, I think skipping President is a little too much, even if ridership is not the greatest over there ;)

 

I think though, the (2) & (5) should have something a little more like this.

 

What I'm thinking of is, it would require a lot of reconstruction, but have east of Franklin Ave the 2 tracks split apart, then the local track & express track will feed into the middle, creating the Nostrand Ave track & then it will turn down Nostrand Ave, making President St more like, Nostrand, Kingston & Utica Aves, stacked.

 

 

And visa versa for northbound trains. They'll just raise from under, yet in between, the eastern parkway tracks & then the (2) will merge left with the (3) & the (5) would merge to the right with the (4).

 

Please let me know if you understand what I'm saying.

Please draw it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It would be a deep bore situation (as supposed to a cut and cover) being that Manhattan bound is already on the LL leaving Nostrand.

 

Would this cause less disruption on the surface than the cut and cover method? I imagine so. Sounds like it would cost more money though.

 

Also, does the narrowness of the street really matter if it is a deep bore situation? I know it matters for cut and cover.

 

TB: A lot of money on the table with your proposal.

 

Money on the table with mine too though. But I was trying to ask for the bare minimum (one measly track and two measly switches!) in hopes of proposing something that might happen within the next decade, especially given the current financial constraints. It might not, but I tried. Your proposal might be what Subway Guy posted a while back:

 

33epxxt.jpg

 

Main reason I would say skip President is that it might make the construction easier. As I said, more room to work with, construction-wise, since the distance from Sterling to Rogers junction is greater. Also a couple of minutes might be saved due to the skipped stop. And the (2) and (5) get out of each other's way faster. If a (2) has to sit at President to let a (3) pass, a (5) does not get delayed by the (2) since it just takes the new track that bypasses President. Then in the event that a (4) is passing on EP and a (2) is right behind the (5) while the (5) is at Sterling, the (5) can proceed into the new tunnel/track (bypassing President) so that the (2) is free to go in spite of the (4) passing on the EP express track. Especially during the AM rush.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also posted this about 2 years ago. I couldn't find my post on this forum with Google, so I reuploaded it:

25uiiyp.png

 

I don't know how much this resembles the physical structure of the junction, but with the doubling of the width of Eastern Parkway, this seems like a doable change. Shove two tracks aside to make room for the Nostrand Avenue line on the West-bound side of the tunnel. Not much has to change for the Nostrand Avenue line itself except shifting the tunnel a bit where it joins Eastern Parkway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I also posted this about 2 years ago. I couldn't find my post on this forum with Google, so I reuploaded it:

25uiiyp.png

 

I don't know how much this resembles the physical structure of the junction, but with the doubling of the width of Eastern Parkway, this seems like a doable change. Shove two tracks aside to make room for the Nostrand Avenue line on the West-bound side of the tunnel. Not much has to change for the Nostrand Avenue line itself except shifting the tunnel a bit where it joins Eastern Parkway.

 

Yes! exactly what I was talking about is in your second diagram! I know it would cost a little & shut down service for a long time, but in the end there will be so many less delays along Eastern Pkwy & Nostrand Ave!

 

Thank you! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Main reason I would say skip President is that it might make the construction easier. As I said, more room to work with, construction-wise, since the distance from Sterling to Rogers junction is greater. Also a couple of minutes might be saved due to the skipped stop. And the (2) and (5) get out of each other's way faster. If a (2) has to sit at President to let a (3) pass, a (5) does not get delayed by the (2) since it just takes the new track that bypasses President. Then in the event that a (4) is passing on EP and a (2) is right behind the (5) while the (5) is at Sterling, the (5) can proceed into the new tunnel/track (bypassing President) so that the (2) is free to go in spite of the (4) passing on the EP express track. Especially during the AM rush.

 

Yeah I see what you're saying & it pretty much makes sense! I like your idea!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
about 2 mins at church... 2 at winthrop, 1 at sterling, [2-3 (normally), 5-8 (if there's a hangup)] at president, and 2 mins to get to franklin from president....

 

so yeh, about 10 minutes (from church).... which is sad, considering that it's supposed to take 10 mins to get from flatbush to franklin! On average, there is no way in hell during the AM rush that a train takes 10 mins to get to franklin from the (f'bush) junction....

 

 

 

this past friday, I was on a (1) out of 242nd (that left 7 mins late) that crossed the bridge... it was coasting along like normal, until we got to 116th - where it stayed for a whopping 16 mins.... then you hear the announcement, ladies & gentlemen, this train is OOS....

 

since it was delayed, I was tryna stick it out to 96th so I can catch the (2).... what I wanted to do that day though, was to ride it to 59th so I can catch the (;)....

 

Do (2)s normally leave Flatbush immediately after (5)s during the AM rush? During the PM rush the norm seems to be that (5)s leave Flatbush immediately after (2)s. Usually a (2) goes, then a (5) goes a minute (or 30 seconds) later, then a (2) goes 4-5 minutes later and so on and so forth.

 

Friday was also the day I did my riding and dealt with that hangup I described at President. Your (1) may have left 242 7 minutes late because it was the first or one of the first trains to go over the bridge after the bridge went back down (so traffic could cross it).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. During the AM Rush it's not too uncommon for (5) trains to be right before (2) trains.... During the PM Rush, I sometimes see this trend reversed. I think the (5) works better as a crowd absorb-er than a (2), so yeah, I think it's better to have (5) trains come first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes. During the AM Rush it's not too uncommon for (5) trains to be right before (2) trains.... During the PM Rush, I sometimes see this trend reversed. I think the (5) works better as a crowd absorb-er than a (2), so yeah, I think it's better to have (5) trains come first.

 

But the advantage of the (2) going first is that the (2)is less likely to wait at President.Maybe that's way it's done that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do (2)s normally leave Flatbush immediately after (5)s during the AM rush? During the PM rush the norm seems to be that (5)s leave Flatbush immediately after (2)s. Usually a (2) goes, then a (5) goes a minute (or 30 seconds) later, then a (2) goes 4-5 minutes later and so on and so forth.

 

Friday was also the day I did my riding and dealt with that hangup I described at President. Your (1) may have left 242 7 minutes late because it was the first or one of the first trains to go over the bridge after the bridge went back down (so traffic could cross it).

 

Not sure which train leaves first, but with the timing I had, the (5) would come before the (2).... 2's would still be more crowded though.....

 

 

and yep, the (1) I was on was the first train out.... b/c when I walked from 238th, a S. Ferry bound train had just left 238th... I got to 242nd, looked at the display, and I had 1 minute to spare.... except a few mins after that, a msg. on the loudspeaker said something about a malfunction on the bridge (don't remember exactly what was said).....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many people are right now suggesting that we fix the President Street tracks, but it is going to require a lot of digging, a lot of money, and a lot of delays. Which is something the (MTA) might not be able to afford.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
About rogers junction here's my diagram....

1485-rogers-junction.png

You did take into account the distance needed to make a ramp possible, right? The diagram suggests that the westbound Nostrand Avenue track has enough room to dive under 2 existing levels, make a turn, rise to make a connection with the second level, and rise again to make a connection with the first level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Many people are right now suggesting that we fix the President Street tracks, but it is going to require a lot of digging, a lot of money, and a lot of delays. Which is something the (MTA) might not be able to afford.

 

Ok, and? And why delay service, just shut down the 2 lines, & have all trains run till Franklin Ave & Shuttle buses replace them.

 

And when it comes to money, with all the fare hikes & service cuts, I dont believe for a second, that the (MTA) doesnt have the money for a project like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to be more realistic though TB. There is a reason why I said "a lot of money on the table with your proposal" and why I tried to ask for the barest minimum possible (one track, two switches, no new platforms, no shifting of existing trackage) in hopes of it actually happening.

 

These are real problems that the MTA has. They did not just pull them out of thin air. Hell, just a couple of weeks ago Cuomo repealed the MTA payroll tax and Albany has been screwing MTA for years. And of course we feel it the most since we use the system. You cannot belittle these problems. They are real. The MTA has budget problems now even with the service cuts and fare hikes and is trying desperately to balance its budget. These are real problems with no easy solutions.

 

Back to Rogers junction. The only 'solution' that is less expensive than my original idea, is to build a single crossover between the westbound express and westbound local track west of Franklin. In that case the (5)s would enter Franklin on the westbound local track, T/Os punch (5) on the new route selector that would be placed at Franklin, then switch to the express track after leaving Franklin.

 

With that new crossover, (5)s would only have to wait for (3)s to pass through Rogers junction, not (4)s. Then a (5) can just leave Franklin and switch to the express track and be on its way to Atlantic.

 

Now the only time a (2) or (5) would stall at President is when a (3) is passing.

 

Only problem is, people might get confused since the (2)(3)(5)s would be arriving on the local track with (4)s arriving on the express track, while the (2)(3)s are the locals and the (4)(5)s are the express. But it would be better for service itself since (5)s would only have to wait at President for (3)s to fly through Rogers junction, not (4)s. Synchronization would be easier since Franklin could be a holding point for (4)s and (5)s (if they arrive together, and I am not sure how often this would happen), instead of the (4) coming from Utica, which is over a mile away and barreling through Rogers junction while a (5) is sitting right there at its holding point (President).

 

If a westbound (4) and (5) arrived at Franklin at the same time, the (5) would probably have priority since the (2)(3) are sharing tracks with it at that point while the (4) is sharing tracks with nobody until the new crossover west of Franklin. (5)s have to get out of the way for (2)(3)s.

 

Also please note that (while discussing solutions that actually require new tunnels to be built) I am trying to avoid the cut and cover method as it is very disruptive. My idea for the new (5) track bypassing President, although it would only require one track and two switches with no new platforms and no shifting of existing trackage, could very well be a pipe dream because deep bore tunneling is much more expensive than cut and cover.

 

But how about that single crossover from the westbound local to westbound express track, west of Franklin instead of the President Street bypass?

Edited by '89 Liberty MCI
I meant westbound local to westbound express track, not westbound express to westbound local! Sorry.

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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.