Jump to content

Crowded A, C subway lines slated for study by MTA


Lance

Recommended Posts

Well with the Queens Blvd derailment if they would have invested into continuously welded rail in time as they should, trains in that broken rail area between Roosevelt Avenue and 36th Street can run at normal speeds without a sudden derailment. There is a sharp radial curve (actually two) right after 65th Street. Usually express trains can hang the turns at 35 MPH as designed slowing down from 40+MPH. That was the way the subway was designed.

 

I understand that when you stated if they even have to shut down for weeks to get the job done it was meant as a tongue in cheek statement, cool. But the main thing is that its an aging system well over a century old, parts of it which is extremely challenging to maintain for a passenger base probably 20 times or more it was originally designed to handle. Understandably a challenge, with political bullshit, red tape and money wrangling factored out. (Or is it?)

 

Solutions? I'm sure it is very hard to find real practical solutions in order to stay technologically competitive with other newer regional or global rapid transit systems

 

The thing is, we can either have no disruptions or run 24/7/365. (There's also the fact that signal and rail replacement is lagging the normal replacement cycle due to 30 years of deferred investment, but people don't like to dwell on that.)

 

One interesting thing to note is that the MTA has identified the Nostrand Junction on the IRT as a future capital project, so that will be interesting to say the least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 123
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The thing is, we can either have no disruptions or run 24/7/365. (There's also the fact that signal and rail replacement is lagging the normal replacement cycle due to 30 years of deferred investment, but people don't like to dwell on that.)

 

One interesting thing to note is that the MTA has identified the Nostrand Junction on the IRT as a future capital project, so that will be interesting to say the least.

 

Does this involve the current budget rehabilitation of the eight deep wells on the Brooklyn IRT? The deep wells are installed for controlling ground water surrounding the subway tunnel to prevent water infiltration? The contract for circuit breaker houses to be rehabed along the line? Or is this something new?

 

I was aware of something like this envisioned in the 1968 plan for action but I never knew that the MTA is actually reconsidering the carrying out of this proposal after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe not K because that's so far away from A on the signs, but rather H. Either way, the likelihood of that happening is slim.

I thought the bullets were grouped by trunk.

But that just makes too much sense it would take too much work to change the rollsigns!

The bullet already exists on rollsigns. Isee it from time to time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does this involve the current budget rehabilitation of the eight deep wells on the Brooklyn IRT? The deep wells are installed for controlling ground water surrounding the subway tunnel to prevent water infiltration? The contract for circuit breaker houses to be rehabed along the line? Or is this something new?

 

I was aware of something like this envisioned in the 1968 plan for action but I never knew that the MTA is actually reconsidering the carrying out of this proposal after all.

There aren't details because it hasn't been included in this Capital Program (but it might be in the one due in October), but the MTA has identified it as a point of interest to include in long-term plans. I would assume it means declogging the Junction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There aren't details because it hasn't been included in this Capital Program (but it might be in the one due in October), but the MTA has identified it as a point of interest to include in long-term plans. I would assume it means declogging the Junction.

 

Ah gotcha, that's why I wasn't familiar with this other than the original plans outlined in the MTA Plan For Action. Sounds good, I'll definitely be on the lookout for the October or December CPOC reports when its published on the MTA calender page. Thanks for the heads up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the bullets were grouped by trunk.

They are, for the most. 8th Avenue is grouped together, as is 6th and so on and so forth. However, the K is the exception to the rule. At least on most signs that is. Rather than being part of the 8th Avenue set, it's located right next to the 6th Ave B. That's because the B and K shared fleets for many years, dating back to when the K was the AA.

 

Regardless, it really doesn't matter as changing the route letter for one branch doesn't make service any better, outside of eliminating some minor confusion on the eastern end of the line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are, for the most. 8th Avenue is grouped together, as is 6th and so on and so forth. However, the K is the exception to the rule. At least on most signs that is. Rather than being part of the 8th Avenue set, it's located right next to the 6th Ave B. That's because the B and K shared fleets for many years, dating back to when the K was the AA.

 

Regardless, it really doesn't matter as changing the route letter for one branch doesn't make service any better, outside of eliminating some minor confusion on the eastern end of the line.

On newer rollsigns (from 2001-2003) on R40-46's the K is next to the (A) bullet

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think (F) is also grouped separately from the other 6th Ave services. I think it's next to (E) on the older rollsigns. Probably because both lines used R46s for years (mostly during pre-GOH) years.

 

That said, if a blue (K) is on the newer rollsigns (post-2001), I would be surprised to see it there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's generally what lines run together. So it was  (JFK)  (A)  (C)  (H)    (E)  (F)  (G)  (R)     (N)  (W) yellow S, yellow B, yellow D  (Q)  (D) orange Q (B)  (K)  (V)  :75px-NYCS-bull-trans-S6_svg: then the Eastern Div. on most.

 

So  (E) happened to be next to  (A)  (C)  (H) because it went from "IND North" to "IND Queens", so it happened that thry were together. But the  (K) was with "BMT South", and thus on the other end. (Along with the  (V) which was just a "6th Ave. extra" at the time).

Someone said there were newer signs, and they arranged some things differently, so I'm not sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I forgot that the (F) also balked the trend so to speak. Regarding the newer signs (2001-onward), any train that was going to run on the (Q)<Q> and (W) lines back in '01 needed new route signs. The older R68 signs only had the <Q>, everything from the R32s upward only had the (Q) and while not really important, there was only the <W> and in 2001, diamond services still meant rush hours (for the most part).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fewer T/Os on the (A) express ignore the timers midway/east of Franklin and fly into Nostrand at 46 mph. That also includes east of Kingston-Throop, where they enter Utica at about 33 mph or 36 mph (?) without applying the brakes at all.

 

As for the Manhattan section of the route, going uptown, the only stretches where the (A) can go smoothly without braking at all is between Canal and W4, and between 145 and 168. Uptown (A) trains can center W4 at 36 mph.

It's impossible to ignore a timer, you would trip the signal...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The areas on the (A)(C) that I've mentioned, including the area between Rockaway and Ralph northbound via local, are the only ones that I've seen fewer T/Os went through without braking at all. See this video (4:20-4:52):

 

 

(I only know how to post the link, sorry about that)

 

I actually wonder how they somehow manage to clear those signals along the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The areas on the (A)(C) that I've mentioned, including the area between Rockaway and Ralph northbound via local, are the only ones that I've seen fewer T/Os went through without braking at all. See this video (4:20-4:52):

 

 

 

(I only know how to post the link, sorry about that)

 

I actually wonder how they somehow manage to clear those signals along the way.

They do the line enough to know when the signal is gonna change, and how fast to actually go to clear it in one shot out without applying the brakes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of which I checked out the set of spurs were supposed to be what would have been going to 76th Street right past Euclid for the proposed Fulton Street expansion (IND Second System). I was on the R32 on the A so I was finally able to see how it looks. (I know its debatable as to if the station itself was actually built).

 

Its the second set of spurs perfectly aligned to indicate this, sitting in almost complete darkness. I find it odd that its actually tracked. The first set leads to Pitkin also the flying junction right past Grant Avenue, before the elevated portion. It hits bumper blocks I believe then walls.

 

Map:

 

Capture_zpsdd6d7086.jpg

Credits: Peter Dougherty

 

 

And this:

 

76stsigdia.jpg

Credits: Far Rock Depot

 

I thought it was pretty interesting now that Union Tpke posted the RFW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of which I checked out the set of spurs were supposed to be what would have been going to 76th Street right past Euclid for the proposed Fulton Street expansion (IND Second System). I was on the R32 on the A so I was finally able to see how it looks. (I know its debatable as to if the station itself was actually built).

 

Its the second set of spurs perfectly aligned to indicate this, sitting in almost complete darkness. I find it odd that its actually tracked. The first set leads to Pitkin also the flying junction right past Grant Avenue, before the elevated portion. It hits bumper blocks I believe then walls.

 

Map:

 

Capture_zpsdd6d7086.jpg

Credits: Peter Dougherty

 

 

And this:

 

76stsigdia.jpg

Credits: Far Rock Depot

 

I thought it was pretty interesting now that Union Tpke posted the RFW.

they had trouble posting it so I posted the link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

Why did they slow the (A) train down though? It moves like 20 mph between stops instead of the normal 45-50 mph that express trains do. It's not like the line has crazy curves, it's a straight shot that should be moving. With the (C) beating the (A) sometimes, that doesn't make sense, and maybe the (A) should receive 60ft cars for more door entrances at stations. It's 2014, the (A) should really have some R160s, (no foam intended, I don't ride the (A) anyway), because that can decrease dwell times as well. And if there's still problems with the Rockaways, do like they do with the R68s, put them Lefferts Blvd bound.

 

With the (C) , I agree the 10 car issue shouldn't be the problem, but to add more frequent service.

yeah agree with you 100% the A should get some R160s or R179s when they get here and the (C) just need extra trains because the most trains that thing uses is 18-19 trains
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The (A) and the (C) need new cars and I also agree that the "express train" is a joke.  There is nothing express from 59th to 125th.  You're better off taking the (B) or the (C).  The other night I was coming from a client's place and got the (D) at 145th.  We CRAWLED Southbound and I wound up missing my express bus as a result.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah agree with you 100% the A should get some R160s or R179s when they get here and the (C) just need extra trains because the most trains that thing uses is 18-19 trains

If you believe that the shorten version of the (A) needs more service, then sure it does....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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