depotofrelax Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1301 Posted October 7, 2012 when R188 conversion get delivered while 126 car is new . Where will first be delivered to which yard & where will the R188 be tested . I am 100% R188 will be delivered to 207 street yard then head to UnionPort Yard , R188 will be tested Eastchester Dyre Avenue Branch that 5 line . Then head to Corona Yard. That how the R142/R142A was delivered to . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RollOver Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1302 Posted October 7, 2012 (edited) The signal system on the White Plains Road line is brand new! Then why is the scheduled to come every 12 minutes on weekends then? Don't a lot of people who are residents of White Plains Road use it for the West Side destinations in Manhattan and/or Flatbush Avenue/Eastern Parkway/Nostrand Avenue destinations in Brooklyn and reverse goes true for northbound? I know that the is a long route with 49 stops and higher ridership compared to the and ... EDIT: The is there serving White Plains Road and/or Nostrand Avenue residents who want West Side service. Edited October 7, 2012 by RollOverMyHead 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewJC Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1303 Posted October 7, 2012 Then why is the scheduled to come every 12 minutes on weekends then? All of the mainline IRT services are limited on weekends by the cap of 18-20 tph on the mainlines to accommodate GO's. The West Side breakdown is 7.5 tph 1 + 5 tph 2 + 5 tph 3 = 17.5 tph; the East Side breakdown is 7.5 tph 4 + 5 tph 5 + 7.5 tph 6 = 20 tph (but the 5 is often reduced to 3 tph on weekends when work is going on in Manhattan, to keep the total down to 18 tph). (What gave you the idea that the age of the signal system had anything to do with it?!) Don't a lot of people who are residents of White Plains Road use it for the West Side destinations in Manhattan and/or Flatbush Avenue/Eastern Parkway/Nostrand Avenue destinations in Brooklyn and reverse goes true for northbound? Of course. I know that the is a long route with 49 stops and higher ridership compared to the and ... What difference does it make how many stops it has? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RollOver Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1304 Posted October 7, 2012 (edited) What difference does it make how many stops it has? I meant to say the riderships along the stations, most likely the busier ones. Edited October 7, 2012 by RollOverMyHead 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RollOver Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1305 Posted October 7, 2012 (edited) (What gave you the idea that the age of the signal system had anything to do with it?!) The needs to be at least 6-8 or just 8 minute headways. 12 minutes is too ridiciously low, especially for a route that has more demands than that of a line that needs CBTC installed and is NEARLY almost elevated as well...That would just add MORE trains to the and ridership there doesn't even warranted it. Edited October 7, 2012 by RollOverMyHead 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttcsubwayfan Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1306 Posted October 7, 2012 is NEARLY almost elevated as well... How can something be nearly almost elevated? It either is or it isn't. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Far Rock Depot Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1307 Posted October 7, 2012 when R188 conversion get delivered while 126 car is new . Where will first be delivered to which yard & where will the R188 be tested . I am 100% R188 will be delivered to 207 street yard then head to UnionPort Yard , R188 will be tested Eastchester Dyre Avenue Branch that 5 line . Then head to Corona Yard. That how the R142/R142A was delivered to . Um....Corona and Corona since they will be for, what that line called, oh yeah- Corona. The delivery of the 142s have nothing to do with the delivery of the 188s once it gets assigned after acceptance at 207 then maybe a quick stint in Broad Channel via Pitkin. The 142s went where they did due to where they were assigning them. The 188s are for Corona. Youre "100%" of unionport would make one assume you work for the MTA. Do you? Because the ones here who do don't even know if that's gonna be the case. All we can do is assume thru logic. Not because it happened with the 142s 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RollOver Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1308 Posted October 7, 2012 (edited) How can something be nearly almost elevated? It either is or it isn't. The and the have longer elevated sections just like the and . But the fact that the and are short routes yet have longer elevated sections like the and makes me wonder why in the hell of the devil would the make lines that have longer routes and one of the highest riderships run every 12 minutes just for the sake of General Orders if the signal systems on those lines are newer? I don't see any sense in that... Edited October 7, 2012 by RollOverMyHead 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewJC Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1309 Posted October 7, 2012 The needs to be at least 6-8 or just 8 minute headways. 12 minutes is too ridiciously low, especially for a route that has more demands than that of a line that needs CBTC installed and is NEARLY almost elevated as well...That would just add MORE trains to the and ridership there doesn't even warranted it. As I asked before, what does that have to do with the age of the signal system? Rush hour service has a train every 2-3 minutes. The signal system can clearly support service that frequent, and the old signal system could as well. As I explained, weekend service is infrequent due to GO-related constraints in Manhattan. The signal system has nothing to do with it. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttcsubwayfan Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1310 Posted October 7, 2012 The and the have longer elevated sections just like the and . But the fact that the and are short routes yet have longer elevated sections like the and makes me wonder why in the hell of the devil would the make lines that have longer routes and one of the highest riderships run every 12 minutes just for the sake of General Orders if the signal systems on those lines are newer? I don't see any sense in that... Well, you didn't answer my question... A line cannot be "almost elevated"... it either is or it isn't. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RollOver Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1311 Posted October 7, 2012 (edited) As I asked before, what does that have to do with the age of the signal system? Fine, I guess I got over complicated and confused... Rush hour service has a train every 2-3 minutes. The signal system can clearly support service that frequent, and the old signal system could as well. Really? What about the IRT Flushing Line since that can be the only alternative for that? I know that the Flushing Line was built around the 1910s and 1920s and stations there open around THAT era. So if the rest of the IRT lines got new signal systems in the 60's and 70's, how come Flushing didn't? There was still time for the to do it in the 80's or 90's? I'm asking why because I don't know if it was funding problems or rail issues. I'm also not taking about CBTC, just a new signal system like all the IRT mainlines have. As I explained, weekend service is infrequent due to GO-related constraints in Manhattan. The signal system has nothing to do with it. What? You mean the bottlenecks where a comes immediately followed by a and then riders at all stations between 135th Street, Manhattan and Franklin Avenue, Brooklyn are stuck waiting another 8 minutes? Or the 145th Street or Nostrand Avenue junctions? Well, you didn't answer my question... A line cannot be "almost elevated"... it either is or it isn't. Yes I did. The and are nearly elevated but a few more stations, most notably the ends are the only ones located undergound. That's what I meant..... On the , after Court Square and after Mets-Willets Point.... And on the , after the Williamsburg Bridge crossing and after 121st Street... Edited October 7, 2012 by RollOverMyHead 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewJC Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1312 Posted October 7, 2012 Fine, I guess I got over complicated and confused... You can say that again! Really? What about the IRT Flushing Line since that can be the only alternative for that? The only alternative for what? I know that the Flushing Line was built around the 1910s and 1920s and stations there open around THAT era. So if the rest of the IRT lines got new signal systems in the 60's and 70's, how come Flushing didn't? There was still time for the to do it in the 80's or 90's? New signal systems are extremely costly, so they have to be phased in over time, as funding becomes available. Signal systems have been modernized since the 50's, a line or two at a time. Now it's Flushing's turn. Plenty of other lines were modernized in the 80's and 90's. What? You mean the bottlenecks where a comes immediately followed by a and then riders at all stations between 135th Street, Manhattan and Franklin Avenue, Brooklyn are stuck waiting another 8 minutes? Or the 145th Street or Nostrand Avenue junctions? I'm talking about GO's where one track is closed for construction. Everything has to merge onto the other track (local or express), and adjacent track flagging often forces those trains to creep through the work area slowly. That is what constrains capacity to about 18 tph. If service is increased on the 2, then it has to be decreased on the 1 or 3 to keep within the 18 tph cap. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RollOver Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1313 Posted October 7, 2012 (edited) The only alternative for what? Never mind, that's already been answered in the previous posts. @ttcsubwayfan I meant that the and are more elevated than underground. Edited October 7, 2012 by RollOverMyHead 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDTA Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1314 Posted October 7, 2012 (edited) I'm talking about GO's where one track is closed for construction. Everything has to merge onto the other track (local or express), and adjacent track flagging often forces those trains to creep through the work area slowly. That is what constrains capacity to about 18 tph. If service is increased on the 2, then it has to be decreased on the 1 or 3 to keep within the 18 tph cap. I don't think there are that many weekend G.O.'s in Manhattan on the IRT, and especially not enough to make a cap for an unlikely hypothetical situation. Edited October 7, 2012 by CDTA 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewJC Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1315 Posted October 7, 2012 I don't think there are that many weekend G.O.'s in Manhattan on the IRT, and especially not enough to make a cap for an unlikely hypothetical situation. There was one last weekend on the East Side, and even with the 5 not running in Manhattan (so only 15 tph with the 4 and 6), the congestion was bad. GO's are pretty common, but even if you don't think capping the service to accommodate GO's is a good idea, that's exactly what was done: http://www.mta.info/...ction/part1.htm ("Reduce Weekend Train Frequencies to Accommodate Construction Work"). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RollOver Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1316 Posted October 7, 2012 This is why after the R62As from the are sent back to the IRT Lexington Avenue Line, only the and will be unplauged with these constant midday, night, and weekend general orders like the rest of the subway system...regardless of the new signalling systems already installed... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDTA Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1317 Posted October 7, 2012 There was one last weekend on the East Side, and even with the 5 not running in Manhattan (so only 15 tph with the 4 and 6), the congestion was bad. GO's are pretty common, but even if you don't think capping the service to accommodate GO's is a good idea, that's exactly what was done: http://www.mta.info/...ction/part1.htm ("Reduce Weekend Train Frequencies to Accommodate Construction Work"). But that was for budget issued, not for the sake of convenience. Besides if it comes down to it, because IRT weekend G.O.'s are so uncommon, they could just cut it when necessary. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewJC Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1318 Posted October 7, 2012 But that was for budget issued, not for the sake of convenience. Besides if it comes down to it, because IRT weekend G.O.'s are so uncommon, they could just cut it when necessary. As explained in the link, the service needs to be cut to that level for GO's. To save money, the cuts were instituted in the regular (picked) schedules, because the MTA has to pay to operate the full scheduled service even when service is reduced for GO's. But on the 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, service was already cut in 2003 to accommodate GO's. I don't know why you say they're so uncommon. Don't you remember weekend after weekend after weekend of 5 trains terminating at Grand Central or of 1 trains terminating at 14th, let alone a basic 6-via-express or 2/3-via-local GO? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDTA Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1319 Posted October 7, 2012 (edited) As explained in the link, the service needs to be cut to that level for GO's. To save money, the cuts were instituted in the regular (picked) schedules, because the MTA has to pay to operate the full scheduled service even when service is reduced for GO's. But on the 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, service was already cut in 2003 to accommodate GO's. I don't know why you say they're so uncommon. Don't you remember weekend after weekend after weekend of 5 trains terminating at Grand Central or of 1 trains terminating at 14th, let alone a basic 6-via-express or 2/3-via-local GO? The basic G.O.s rarely happen though. When was the last time you've seen a local ? EDIT: Grammar fail. Never listen to music while typing, kids! Edited October 7, 2012 by CDTA 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewJC Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1320 Posted October 7, 2012 The basic G.O.s rarely happen tough? When was the last time you've seen a local ? I don't keep a historical calendar of GO's, but the 3 has run local every weekend for months on end in the past. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDTA Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1321 Posted October 7, 2012 I don't keep a historical calendar of GO's, but the 3 has run local every weekend for months on end in the past. Never seen this before. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lance Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1322 Posted October 7, 2012 It happens a lot when the 1 turns at 14 St for WTC/South Ferry work. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDTA Posted October 7, 2012 Share #1323 Posted October 7, 2012 I must be out of the loop then... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brighton Express Posted October 14, 2012 Share #1324 Posted October 14, 2012 Speaking of the R188, what do you think could have been done differently? I honestly don't like that they upgraded the R142s, and that the R188s should have had FINDs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDTA Posted October 14, 2012 Share #1325 Posted October 14, 2012 Speaking of the R188, what do you think could have been done differently? I honestly don't like that they upgraded the R142s, and that the R188s should have had FINDs. You have another idea as to where they are going to run eleven car trains of A division cars which are equipped with Flushing CBTC equipment? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.