BrooklynIRT Posted June 16, 2012 Share #1 Posted June 16, 2012 What problems would be incurred if track directions were swapped? For example, right now on the IRT Livonia Ave line you have eastbound trains using the south track (track 1) and westbound trains using the north track (track 4). Swapping the track directions would mean having eastbound trains use track 4 and having westbound trains use track 1 instead. I know this seems rather silly and some might think why on earth would MTA want to do that, but I think I have a good reason as to why this might be appropriate. It has to do with re-configuring the tracks east of Utica a little bit in order to have the end at Utica and have the end at New Lots full-time without the trains having to cross over each other. I just want to know if swapping the track directions can be done without incurring mass chaos. Other than signage changes and announcements and notices to get people accustomed to the service changes wherever necessary of course, which would not translate into mass chaos. At least not in the long run since it would be a service increase for points east of Utica and would send more express trains out there when express trains are usually supposed to serve the far reaches of the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTimer Posted June 16, 2012 Share #2 Posted June 16, 2012 A new set of switches around the area of the portal so 3 track can merge back into 1 would be sufficient. There is room for a turn out on well on 4 track just inside the portal to go over to 3. In that way a train on 1 tk can turn at Utica without affecting 3 or 4. Again its all about money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynIRT Posted June 16, 2012 Author Share #3 Posted June 16, 2012 Yeah, I just realized after going over the diagram thoroughly that there is no need to swap the track directions in order to build new connections between tracks on the same level (no new bi-level tracks that take trains from one level to the other themselves as we want to keep the costs down) to allow for express trains to go to New Lots and locals to terminate at Utica without interfering with each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynIRT Posted June 16, 2012 Author Share #4 Posted June 16, 2012 Not sure if you were referring to the eastbound express trains, but for those they could just take that M-track that ends just before you exit the tunnel, eliminate its bumping block, and connect it to track 1. Now the eastbound express trains can take the existing crossover that connects track 2 to the M-track, which would be newly connected to track 1, and go to New Lots. Then as you said for the westbound express trains from New Lots they would have to build that crossover on the lower level to connect track 4 to track 3, and the westbound express trains would take this crossover from track 4 to track 3 to run express down Eastern Pkwy. Now the locals terminating at Utica (I guess most of them would end there unless ridership east of Utica skyrocketed) would relay by going down track 1 to a safe distance away from the new switch connecting M-track to track 1 for eastbound express trains (or bumping block if they decided to have track 1 end in a bumping block at that point rather than merge with the newly extended M-track), then come back west via one of the existing switches to the M-track (these trains would not be using the same section of the M-track as the expresses heading to New Lots, so there would be no conflicts), which descends as you follow it westward. Now the train takes the switch to track 4 rather than track 3 (expresses ending at Utica currently do the latter). With all of this going on they could still get some locals to New Lots without interfering with locals terminating at Utica. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamen Rider Posted June 16, 2012 Share #5 Posted June 16, 2012 why are we cutting back the 3 full time? it's primary operating base is Livonia, why are you making it deadhead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynIRT Posted June 16, 2012 Author Share #6 Posted June 16, 2012 When they need to send a back to the yard or send a out of the yard they can send the train in service down Livonia Ave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamen Rider Posted June 16, 2012 Share #7 Posted June 16, 2012 or.... how abou this idea... we not try to fix what isn't broken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BM5 via Woodhaven Posted June 17, 2012 Share #8 Posted June 17, 2012 It would be foaming if one decides to built a bridge on top of the 3 tracks on Livonia just for the sake of express service Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTimer Posted June 17, 2012 Share #9 Posted June 17, 2012 Whose building a bridge lol? I think the idea was to replace the with the to New Lots (all times, exp to Utica) since the is already a 19-7 line basically (south of TSq) and runs roughly the same headway as the out of Parkchester, which also has to relay. The idea would (in theory) move the conga line further east, and out of the area of the junction (as we all well know that's his pet peeve above all others). It also would reduce the amount of trains the line needs to run at the sacrifice of losing a pocket to relay in (right now the relays out of two pockets at Utica). While it's main barn is Livonia, it already has a yard for access on the other end, so its not like you're taking away its only yard. As was said earlier, just like trains go lite to New Lots, so can OoS 's. If this was ever done, tech trains would have to be run on the line because 62s charge very slow in comparison to 142/A. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VWM Posted June 17, 2012 Share #10 Posted June 17, 2012 Isn't the other yard, like stupidly small? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lance Posted June 17, 2012 Share #11 Posted June 17, 2012 What, the Lenox Yard? Well yeah; that's why it's primarily a layup yard and Livonia's the main yard for the line, not the other way around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTimer Posted June 17, 2012 Share #12 Posted June 17, 2012 All that is needed is yard access, its not like the yard has to be linked directly to a line via a short lead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Threxx Posted June 17, 2012 Share #13 Posted June 17, 2012 All that is needed is yard access, its not like the yard has to be linked directly to a line via a short lead. That's why the old route, 95th Street-Astoria couldn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTimer Posted June 17, 2012 Share #14 Posted June 17, 2012 That's why the old route, 95th Street-Astoria couldn't work. You really seem to not understand what is meant here. Yes that didn't work because there was no yard anywhere near those two terminals. In this case, its a same-track move, which is yard access, not a long ping-pong move that the had to do, and still does now (at least the 95 layups). The in no way is "losing" a barn or yard by only going to Utica. it just has to go a couple miles farther on the same track to reach one. No one ever said to "give" Livonia yard to the being that it goes to New Lots full time. Just like the Parkchester in the Bronx has to go a few stations to reach Westchester yard (sandwiched in between Pelham trains), the can do the same. Hell, some 's go all the way back to 137 to layup when 240th is full. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynIRT Posted June 17, 2012 Author Share #15 Posted June 17, 2012 If the ends at Utica they can probably just run it every 10 minutes middays and rush hours (less service than now) while increasing 7th Ave-Nostrand service to keep the total TPH on the combined 7th Ave Express services the same. If there cannot be that many 7th Ave-Nostrand trains then I guess the only answer would be to build pocket tracks and/or a new platform under or next to an existing station somewhere west of Rogers junction to handle any 7th Ave Express trains that cannot go through Rogers junction without restricting the number of Lex-Nostrand trains that can go through. Unless ending some trains at TSQ using the M-track up there is sufficient and possible, which it may not be since fumigation is required and through 7th Ave Express trains may be delayed too much during rush hours. That move would be executed mainly to make service north of TSQ. Towards TSQ AM rush, from TSQ PM rush. While replacing Eastern Pkwy Local service with Eastern Pkwy Express east of Utica is important for crowd distribution and service improvement particularly for Livonia Ave riders, the whole point of this plan is to allow more Nostrand trains, especially Lex-Nostrand trains, to pass through Rogers junction. I am not sure how much of an impediment Rogers junction is to sending more trains, especially Lex trains, down Nostrand, but Flatbush Ave terminal would also have to be enhanced to make it possible to send more trains down Nostrand. Allow any train to use any track, and either build tails south of the terminal or extend the platforms 100 feet northward and move the [10] northward by that same distance in order to speed up the terminal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTimer Posted June 17, 2012 Share #16 Posted June 17, 2012 Its not the that's the problem, its the . When the does a move (either direction) in that area, all train traffic in that given direction stops until the move is finished. The does not interrupt anything else when they go through the area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynIRT Posted June 17, 2012 Author Share #17 Posted June 17, 2012 There is one pair of rush hour trains on both the 7th-Nostrand and Lex-Nostrand line that runs 10+ minutes apart (and is even scheduled to do this), and based on what I saw and experienced (some serious crush loads) when I waited almost 10 minutes for a at the Brooklyn Museum during rush hour the other day, took it to Franklin, had a 7th-Nostrand come to Franklin 2 minutes later, could not fit on it, and then had a Lex-Nostrand come to Franklin 2 minutes after and took that to Flatbush (and a came simultaneously, and the had to wait one minute for the to clear the junction), it seems like neither the 7th-Nostrand nor the Lex-Nostrand service should EVER be 10+ minutes apart during rush hours. The I rode from Brooklyn Museum to Franklin was very crowded and needless to say the following that I was unable to board at Franklin was even worse. And, a very crowded New Lots arrived at Franklin with that so it had to pick up the people that transferred. Fortunately only a handful made the transfer. The 10+ minute thing only seems to happen in the PM rush though. Ideally I think the 7th-Nostrand trains should never run more than 8 minutes apart while the Lex-Nostrand trains should never run more than 6 minutes apart. What I wonder is whether some 7th Ave Express trains would have to end somewhere west of Rogers junction in order for this to happen, and this is where new pocket tracks/platforms at an existing station would likely have to come in. Overall the service on the Brooklyn IRT including the Nostrand Ave branch is very good (regardless of merging delays) and is at a level that other neighborhoods would like to have as I was impressed that a Nostrand train with enough room for me to board came to Franklin less than 4 minutes after I got there, but still my experience that day was kinda nuts with the long wait at Brooklyn Museum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewJC Posted June 18, 2012 Share #18 Posted June 18, 2012 What problems would be incurred if track directions were swapped? The line would need to be resignaled from scratch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynIRT Posted June 18, 2012 Author Share #19 Posted June 18, 2012 Thanks Andrew. I see there is probably no need to swap directions to enhance the Brooklyn IRT though. Just to clarify when I waited almost 10 minutes for that at Brooklyn Museum, that was the first train to show up, and it was PM rush not AM in case anybody was wondering. Also I meant that the 10+ minute thing happens in PM rush but not AM AFAIK. And the maximum headways of 8 minutes for the 7th-Nostrand service and 6 minutes for the Lex-Nostrand service are just for rush hours at the very least. 8 minutes average for both services during middays like it is now is no problem AFAIK. Maximum headways just refer to the maximum spacing between trains. Not the average spacing. Of course they would have to run 7th-Nostrand trains every 5 to 6 minutes as they do now. Again, just clarifications. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.