Quill Depot Posted March 20, 2014 Share #26 Posted March 20, 2014 Sounds good for service changes, but not on a normal basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RollOver Posted March 20, 2014 Share #27 Posted March 20, 2014 Of course its not good for service changes either. Do you seriously think they will go out of their way to just relay the all the way back at 57th and then re-enter service at Lex-63rd? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
46Dover Posted March 20, 2014 Author Share #28 Posted March 20, 2014 Are there tracks not laid on the side that is on the Second Ave side? If not, then it's a moot point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cl94 Posted March 21, 2014 Share #29 Posted March 21, 2014 The north side is under construction for SAS. They're renovating the entire station and making that half usable, in addition to building a new line starting at the east end of the station. There have been layup tracks over there since the station opened, but I'm pretty sure they're OOS for construction. If you tore the wall down, there was a perfectly usable platform over there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted March 21, 2014 Share #30 Posted March 21, 2014 What could possibly be done before any of the stations on SAS opens, but the station, and a portion of the SAS are competed as far as wherever the next switch is, is have the stop at Lexington and relay onto the SAS and then go back into service on the other level. But they probably won't bother with that, and will just wait until the first new stations open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamen Rider Posted March 21, 2014 Share #31 Posted March 21, 2014 Are there tracks not laid on the side that is on the Second Ave side? If not, then it's a moot point Laid? Yes. Usable? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
46Dover Posted March 21, 2014 Author Share #32 Posted March 21, 2014 What could possibly be done before any of the stations on SAS opens, but the station, and a portion of the SAS are competed as far as wherever the next switch is, is have the stop at Lexington and relay onto the SAS and then go back into service on the other level. But they probably won't bother with that, and will just wait until the first new stations open. I imagine the next stop after the Lex Av in that case would be, what, 72 St? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted March 22, 2014 Share #33 Posted March 22, 2014 What could possibly be done before any of the stations on SAS opens, but the station, and a portion of the SAS are competed as far as wherever the next switch is, is have the stop at Lexington and relay onto the SAS and then go back into service on the other level. But they probably won't bother with that, and will just wait until the first new stations open. It wouldn't really make sense to cut the from Astoria prematurely; better to just do all the changes at once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewJC Posted March 25, 2014 Share #34 Posted March 25, 2014 Um...no. Next crossover south of there is immediately north of 57th. As said before, train would have to wrong-rail that entire distance, limiting capacity. And there's the fact that the tracks are on different levels. Nothing can really terminate there on either line because of where crossovers are located. Does the signal system even allow those reverse moves? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cl94 Posted March 25, 2014 Share #35 Posted March 25, 2014 Does the signal system even allow those reverse moves? While the older parts of the system are not reverse-signalled, the newer stuff is, along with most (if not all) river crossings. Even if it isn't reverse signalled, they could always have a train key by the protecting signal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RTOMan Posted March 26, 2014 Share #36 Posted March 26, 2014 While the older parts of the system are not reverse-signalled, the newer stuff is, along with most (if not all) river crossings. Even if it isn't reverse signalled, they could always have a train key by the protecting signalNot true you can do reverse moves at CTL,Parsons Hillside, and Roosevelt ave on the queens blvd corridor... Done it myself. Of course those old signals will be taken out once the get that master tower near completion. Sent from my iPad using TapatalkOh and Union Turnpike Kew a Gardens as well. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itmaybeokay Posted March 26, 2014 Share #37 Posted March 26, 2014 Does the signal system even allow those reverse moves? While the older parts of the system are not reverse-signalled, the newer stuff is, along with most (if not all) river crossings. Even if it isn't reverse signalled, they could always have a train key by the protecting signal It may be more complex than simply keying by. I was on an R train over the winter that was rerouted via 63. We left Lex/63 and crossed over to the mostly-disused BMT 63 St Line and were met with ice on the tracks so high we could not proceed. I was listening on a scanner and the decision was made to reverse into Lex/63 and continue down 6 Av IND terminating at 2nd Av. It was a time consuming, complicated procedure. In addition to having to halt and or reroute F trains all the way back to 558 ball at 36 St on the QBL - The T/O had to manually drive down and hook at least one stop arm. If you're unfamiliar, this involves the operator physically leaving the train and descending to the roadbed. Hooking a stop arm is not a procedure that's practical for everyday moves. I know that this particular move isn't quite what would be done were the to turn at Lex/63 - but it's an indication that the area is probably not reverse-signalled. (original post on that r train thing here if you're in any way curious about more details http://www.nyctransitforums.com/forums/topic/34484-unplanned-subway-service-changes-discussion/) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
46Dover Posted March 26, 2014 Author Share #38 Posted March 26, 2014 Does the signal system even allow those reverse moves? While the older parts of the system are not reverse-signalled, the newer stuff is, along with most (if not all) river crossings. Even if it isn't reverse signalled, they could always have a train key by the protecting signal An excellent example: I actually rode a a few years back that went wrong rail from Grand Central to Hunters Point Av late at night due to construction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowblock Posted March 27, 2014 Share #39 Posted March 27, 2014 That wrong rail move is made every Thursday morning during the weekly Steinway Tube inspections Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted March 28, 2014 Share #40 Posted March 28, 2014 Not true you can do reverse moves at CTL,Parsons Hillside, and Roosevelt ave on the queens blvd corridor... Done it myself. Of course those old signals will be taken out once the get that master tower near completion. Sent from my iPad using TapatalkOh and Union Turnpike Kew a Gardens as well. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Snowblock answered a question of mine concerning this with an 8 car marker facing in the normal direction on the Jamaica bound local track at Continental. Using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowblock Posted March 28, 2014 Share #41 Posted March 28, 2014 No I didn't, that was RTOMan again. Queens is his territory, I just visit there now and then...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RTOMan Posted March 28, 2014 Share #42 Posted March 28, 2014 No I didn't, that was RTOMan again. Queens is his territory, I just visit there now and then...... Sooner or later somebody will figure it out Snowblock that I just don't talk... To hear myself talk heh! Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PATCOman Posted March 28, 2014 Share #43 Posted March 28, 2014 Snowblock answered a question of mine concerning this with an 8 car marker facing in the normal direction on the Jamaica bound local track at Continental. Using Tapatalk That was me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted March 28, 2014 Share #44 Posted March 28, 2014 That was me. Oops sorry, I sometimes forget about these things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted March 28, 2014 Share #45 Posted March 28, 2014 I swear that's why everyone wants the to run express in Brooklyn, Rutgers-8th and/or Cranberry/6th service, the to old South Ferry on weekends, etc. etc. I'm waiting for somebody to suggest the return of the Canarsie-Jamaica-6th Avenue service (or even one on 8th to take advantage of W4 interlocking) or a Pelham-Lex Express.the F express in brooklyn from jay st to church av would at least make the ride quicker for the riders south of the park slope stops. Yes the F can't be split, and in the end it probably won't make a difference, but why should a block of riders force everyone else to have a slower ride because they don't want a percived service decrease? If there was an express, the trains from the south would bypass the park slope stops while the local would be empty and park slope riders would have emptier trains. Back to the original topic, as said two levels is not ideal and it is a very long way from the nearest set of switches. What they should've done was kept 72nd as a 3 track station and use that as a part time terminal/short turn. So there's no reason to open 63rd st for the Q till the sas to 96th st is ready. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E train line Posted March 29, 2014 Share #46 Posted March 29, 2014 I will say no Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
46Dover Posted March 29, 2014 Author Share #47 Posted March 29, 2014 the F express in brooklyn from jay st to church av would at least make the ride quicker for the riders south of the park slope stops. Yes the F can't be split, and in the end it probably won't make a difference, but why should a block of riders force everyone else to have a slower ride because they don't want a percived service decrease? If there was an express, the trains from the south would bypass the park slope stops while the local would be empty and park slope riders would have emptier trains. Back to the original topic, as said two levels is not ideal and it is a very long way from the nearest set of switches. What they should've done was kept 72nd as a 3 track station and use that as a part time terminal/short turn. So there's no reason to open 63rd st for the Q till the sas to 96th st is ready. How many tracks are supposed to go up to 96th? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cl94 Posted March 29, 2014 Share #48 Posted March 29, 2014 How many tracks are supposed to go up to 96th? 2. 3rd at 72nd was dropped due to cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted March 29, 2014 Share #49 Posted March 29, 2014 I will say nolol, wow, so much thought put into that post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
46Dover Posted March 30, 2014 Author Share #50 Posted March 30, 2014 2. 3rd at 72nd was dropped due to cost. Money. Heh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.