Second Avenue Subway Discussion

[Phil Plotch]

Thanks.  I agree "Routes not Taken" does give a good overview of the line's history.   Environmental Impact Statements do provide extensive information.   Wikipedia entries are enormously helpful.  But to really understand what happened, there is no substitute for talking to people with the inside scoop.  That's how I was able to write "Politics Across the Hudson: The Tappan Zee Megaproject."

[R42N]

. 

On October 1, 2017 at 2:56 PM, Union Tpke said:

I have heard about this. I edit wikipedia, and try to improve existing articles and make them more accurate. While it is wikipedia, there is quite a lot of information on the SAS there. I am Kew Gardens 613 there, and along with a few other users, I have added information on the project's history and construction. In fact, the article had gotten way too large, so the History of the Second Avenue Subway was split off into another article. There are many sources listed for the article that might be able to point you in the right direction.

Good luck on your project!

I find Wikipedia’s knowledge of the SAS service a little spotty. 

For example, it’s states, that the train makes selected trips to 96st /  2ave, which is true, but it only does this in the southbound direction. All northbound runs have been signed as ’s via Sea Beach since January, yet there is no acknowledgment of the ’s running northbound on Sea Beach on Wiki

One counter argument would be that they are internal trains, but then aren’t all  trains internal trains? Why are it’s selected trips shown on Wiki? 

Of course, I don’t rely on it, but I find it interesting when, at the 72nd street station, it promotes northbound  ’s, when there has never been a northbound  train outside of a service change. 

[Around the Horn]

2 hours ago, R42N said:

. 

I find Wikipedia’s knowledge of the SAS service a little spotty. 

For example, it’s states, that the train makes selected trips to 96st /  2ave, which is true, but it only does this in the southbound direction. All northbound runs have been signed as ’s via Sea Beach since January, yet there is no acknowledgment of the ’s running northbound on Sea Beach on Wiki

One counter argument would be that they are internal trains, but then aren’t all  trains internal trains? Why are it’s selected trips shown on Wiki? 

Of course, I don’t rely on it, but I find it interesting when, at the 72nd street station, it promotes northbound  ’s, when there has never been a northbound  train outside of a service change. 

The  trains via Sea Beach are indeed  train crews. The  is not an internal  train, just the /  share a fleet/employee pool. 

[Lance]

Wikipedia is not a transit guide. While the northbound trains are labelled as trains on the external signs, the actual schedule released by the MTA, which Wikipedia is basing their information on, states that those selected trains are still trains despite running to 96 Street.

[R42N]

6 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

The  trains via Sea Beach are indeed  train crews. The  is not an internal  train, just the /  share a fleet/employee pool. 

I understand what you are saying, but per the internal work programs, the  ’s are ’s the same way Second Ave  ’s are  ’s (which I ironically found via Wikipedia)

https://progressiveaction.files.wordpress.com/2016/08/sub-division-b-general-distribution-fall-2016-wp-book.pdf

5 hours ago, Lance said:

Wikipedia is not a transit guide. While the northbound trains are labelled as trains on the external signs, the actual schedule released by the MTA, which Wikipedia is basing their information on, states that those selected trains are still trains despite running to 96 Street.

That’s exactly my point, Wikipedia is not a transit guide, which is why I don’t rely on them, due to their spotty knowledge. 

Take a look at that schedule, there are seven  ’s that do not originate at Coney Island, as they come in from the yard, yet that isn’t mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia, while the three AM (N)’s, that to the public appear as  ’s northbound, and usually appear as  “last stop” southbound until 57/7, receive their own “branch” on the station guide. 

 

Edited October 6, 2017 by R42N

[Around the Horn]

2 hours ago, R42N said:

I understand what you are saying, but per the internal work programs, the  ’s are ’s the same way Second Ave  ’s are  ’s (which I ironically found via Wikipedia)

https://progressiveaction.files.wordpress.com/2016/08/sub-division-b-general-distribution-fall-2016-wp-book.pdf

That’s exactly my point, Wikipedia is not a transit guide, which is why I don’t rely on them, due to their spotty knowledge. 

Take a look at that schedule, there are seven  ’s that do not originate at Coney Island, as they come in from the yard, yet that isn’t mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia, while the three AM (N)’s, that to the public appear as  ’s northbound, and usually appear as  “last stop” southbound until 57/7, receive their own “branch” on the station guide. 

 

I fail to see why the trains that start at 86th Street are newsworthy. The only station they miss is Coney Island and they go to Astoria like every other normal (N), meanwhile the trains to 96th Street are on a separate branch that the normally doesn't serve. Now if there were trains that ended at 86th Street, it would probably get mentioned. (The trips that begin at E 105 Street also don't get mentioned by Wikipedia either)

[R42N]

2 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

I fail to see why the trains that start at 86th Street are newsworthy. The only station they miss is Coney Island and they go to Astoria like every other normal (N), meanwhile the trains to 96th Street are on a separate branch that the normally doesn't serve. Now if there were trains that ended at 86th Street, it would probably get mentioned. (The trips that begin at E 105 Street also don't get mentioned by Wikipedia either)

This is still my point. Everything on Wikipedia is objective and unofficial. You believe what you believe, and I believe that saying “all trains” stop at Coney Island while “most trains” go to 5th Ave/59th is inaccurate , because it is. Wikipedia is a (frequently wrong) encyclopedia, not a news source, so if it was reliable, it wouldn’t make these small mistakes. 

It’s not just the  , there are countless issues that keep me away from Wikipedia, like how the R42 is only assigned to the and  even though they are clearly also running on the  . 

This expands far beyond New York transit, Wikipedia is great for entry level quick knowledge, but makes many mistakes at the advanced level.  

[Lance]

I think that's intentional on the part of the mods there on Wikipedia, especially when it comes to topics such as this. It's meant to be more of a casual look into things like this, rather than a look into every microscopic aspect of subway operation. If you ever comb through some Wikipedia articles, not necessarily based on the subway, you'll see a message that says the present iteration of an article is too detailed for the general audience. For that kind of granular detail, you're better off coming to a transit forum like this.

Another thing to consider is that Wikipedia likes specific sources. While anyone with eyes can see that the shuttle uses 42s, there is currently no written proof of this, hence its omission on the Wikipedia car roster.

[R42N]

22 minutes ago, Lance said:

I think that's intentional on the part of the mods there on Wikipedia, especially when it comes to topics such as this. It's meant to be more of a casual look into things like this, rather than a look into every microscopic aspect of subway operation. If you ever comb through some Wikipedia articles, not necessarily based on the subway, you'll see a message that says the present iteration of an article is too detailed for the general audience. For that kind of granular detail, you're better off coming to a transit forum like this.

Another thing to consider is that Wikipedia likes specific sources. While anyone with eyes can see that the shuttle uses 42s, there is currently no written proof of this, hence its omission on the Wikipedia car roster.

Right, that’s what I’m saying, Wikipedia is great for entry level knowledge, but at an advanced level, I recommend other sites, including these forums. as you said, for more precise knowledge. 

[Union Tpke]

7 hours ago, R42N said:

Right, that’s what I’m saying, Wikipedia is great for entry level knowledge, but at an advanced level, I recommend other sites, including these forums. as you said, for more precise knowledge. 

For day-to-day changes, fleet assignments, and things that cannot be adequately sourced (things heard by word of mouth or from inside sources) you should get information here. However, for historical information (e.g. the construction of, opening of, planning of, and long-term operation of services, routes, and lines) one should look at books on the subject or to Wikipedia, which provides expansive lists of sources from where to continue your research.

[CenSin]

I have doubts about increasing service along Second Avenue with CBTC absent. The current signaling system seems to handle current loads poorly with trains always crawling along Broadway. An increase in service must necessarily come with CBTC to iron out some wrinkles in train operations (the ones that are within MTA’s ability to control). The train operator on my train was noticeably slower than others going down Sea Beach. Such inconsistencies cause uneven spacing between trains.

[MassTransitHonchkrow]

On 10/1/2017 at 9:17 PM, RR503 said:

I would also check out the book "Routes not Taken" -- gives a good overview of the line's history. 

If you want info on the current iteration, read the various EISs. They'll tell all. 

I finished reading that this past summer. Excellent choice. 

A lot of split interests have held transit back long before the MTA existed, and I think that book covers the issue well.

 

I got my copy at the Clinton Hill branch.

[MassTransitHonchkrow]

On 10/10/2017 at 9:00 PM, CenSin said:

Such inconsistencies cause uneven spacing between trains.

Or worse, outages that can creep to other parts of the system.

Do you think the flourescents should go? Like, how much power do they suck up?

[IAlam]

On 10/7/2017 at 10:52 AM, Lance said:

I think that's intentional on the part of the mods there on Wikipedia, especially when it comes to topics such as this. It's meant to be more of a casual look into things like this, rather than a look into every microscopic aspect of subway operation. If you ever comb through some Wikipedia articles, not necessarily based on the subway, you'll see a message that says the present iteration of an article is too detailed for the general audience. For that kind of granular detail, you're better off coming to a transit forum like this.

Another thing to consider is that Wikipedia likes specific sources. While anyone with eyes can see that the shuttle uses 42s, there is currently no written proof of this, hence its omission on the Wikipedia car roster.

I'm not 100% sure about this but I believe you can sometimes cite with YouTube.

[Lance]

Tell that to the wiki nerds there. The mods for the NYC regional transit network are a bit anal regarding sources, which in this case is Joe Korman for car assignments. Unfortunately, since he's been out of commission for a while due to health-related problems and no one else gets the car assignment list changes, we have a stale assignment information.

[LGA Link N Train]

Anyways back on topic, the 125 Street extension should not be built with the 125 Street station but instead extend to the Bronx with another line coming from Queens and Branches to south Brooklyn and Fulton.......

I don't know, I saw that were getting a little off topic. ...

[R42N]

On October 18, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Lance said:

Tell that to the wiki nerds there. The mods for the NYC regional transit network are a bit anal regarding sources, which in this case is Joe Korman for car assignments. Unfortunately, since he's been out of commission for a while due to health-related problems and no one else gets the car assignment list changes, we have a stale assignment information.

See that’s exactly the problem. Unless if it’s the official site, I don’t get how Wikipedia doesn’t check their other sources to verify that their information is correct. It’s not just here, it happens on the aviation pages as well. 

 

As LGA was saying, we are drifting off topic (even though this is a good conversation). 

 

Any idea when those 1-2 trains are going to head up SAS? 

[Lance]

I thought someone said it was happening with the new pick this year. I'm not sure though, so take that with a grain of salt.

[Union Tpke]

4 hours ago, Lance said:

I thought someone said it was happening with the new pick this year. I'm not sure though, so take that with a grain of salt.

When initially announced, it said Fall 2017, which should mean the first week of November 2017. Look on transit apps. They sometimes get new timetables before they are on the website.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

On 10/24/2017 at 1:18 PM, R42N said:

Any idea when those 1-2 trains are going to head up SAS? 

 

4 hours ago, Lance said:

I thought someone said it was happening with the new pick this year. I'm not sure though, so take that with a grain of salt.

Personally, I hope they don’t. I’d much prefer they figure out a better option to run 1-2 extra rush hour trains to/from 2nd Ave. I just think crossing those northbound   trains from the local to the express before 57th St is going to jam up the line and vice versa with the southbound trains switching from the express.

[R42N]

16 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

 

Personally, I hope they don’t. I’d much prefer they figure out a better option to run 1-2 extra rush hour trains to/from 2nd Ave. I just think crossing those northbound   trains from the local to the express before 57th St is going to jam up the line and vice versa with the southbound trains switching from the express.

Well, Astoria (with the booming LIC/Hoyt population) really needs more trains than it has (Even if it is at maximum TPH on the schedule, they often fall behind which leads to massive gaps in service during rush hours.

Queens Blvd, on the other hand, is doing quite well, and can spare an  or an  without much (any) issue. So, unless if you want to switch northern terminals to provide one extra train, the will be going up SAS. 

I really don’t see an issue with this. As long as it’s not a regular thing, one switch will not ruin the day. The Broadway Line is not the Lexington Avenue Line, it’s headways are not overwhelming to the point where merging isn’t feasible. 

 

[CenSin]

15 minutes ago, R42N said:

Well, Astoria (with the booming LIC/Hoyt population) really needs more trains than it has (Even if it is at maximum TPH on the schedule, they often fall behind which leads to massive gaps in service during rush hours.

Queens Blvd, on the other hand, is doing quite well, and can spare an  or an  without much (any) issue. So, unless if you want to switch northern terminals to provide one extra train, the will be going up SAS. 

I really don’t see an issue with this. As long as it’s not a regular thing, one switch will not ruin the day. The Broadway Line is not the Lexington Avenue Line, it’s headways are not overwhelming to the point where merging isn’t feasible. 

 

or

• −2  to Astoria
• +2  to 2 Avenue
• −2  to Forest Hills
• +2  to Astoria
• +2  to Forest Hills

[Wallyhorse]

2 hours ago, CenSin said:

or

• −2  to Astoria
• +2  to 2 Avenue
• −2  to Forest Hills
• +2  to Astoria
• +2  to Forest Hills

Still think long-term the way to do it (and also increase service which is coming anyway with the  shutdown) with splitting the into and  with the to 96th & 2nd.  That gives second avenue riders the additional service without any merges beyond what already takes place on the Broadway Line and gives SAS rides a 6th Avenue option).  

[T to Dyre Avenue]

19 minutes ago, Wallyhorse said:

Still think long-term the way to do it (and also increase service which is coming anyway with the  shutdown) with splitting the into and  with the to 96th & 2nd.  That gives second avenue riders the additional service without any merges beyond what already takes place on the Broadway Line and gives SAS rides a 6th Avenue option).  

Except it’s not possible to do that now...as in right now. The  line is still fully open and we still don’t have any R179s in service (their newest teething problems might keep them out of service for a long while), so we don’t have enough cars for  the T service.  That may change in 2019, but I don’t think the crowding on the  can wait till then. 

[R42N]

10 hours ago, CenSin said:

or

• −2  to Astoria
• +2  to 2 Avenue
• −2  to Forest Hills
• +2  to Astoria
• +2  to Forest Hills

 

There isn’t any room to add additional  sets, and even if so, Whitehall couldn’t accommodate it. 

Adding an extra  is the most painless scenario.