Jump to content

Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Sign in to follow this  
Joel Up Front

Why is the subway slower than it used to be?

Recommended Posts

Depends on what you mean by efficient. In terms of travel times, the proliferation of timers most definitely does not help. In terms of safety and train operation, absolutely it does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No they do not.

 

The fastest they will do on any stretch in Queens Blvd. is high 40s before timers or posted speed restrictions force the train to slow down.

 

SMEE trains of the old days were faster than everything running today by far. NTT's are not "governed" per se, but they are programmed to limit their ability to accelerate significantly once they reach 45. Getting 50 without a downgrade is just about impossible with tech trains. SMEE trains have lost their get up and go with the removal of field shunting, as this carried the trains through acceleration at higher speeds, which generally falls off a cliff around 30, and really struggles at 40. The older SMEE trains also had much stronger (better) brakes. This was changed in the early/mid 1990s when the old J-1 relay valves and cast iron shoes were swapped out for J-14 relay valves and composition shoes. The "benefit" was a smoother ride, but it significantly lengthened stopping distances. This was a contributing factor to the Williamsburg Bridge wreck (insufficient emergency stopping distance), and led to the addition of many of the timers, as well as lengthening the protection (more red signals) behind trains in certain signal blocks, throughout the system. The result is the slower system you see today.

 

It is slowed further by heavy riding and congestion throughout - typically outer boroughs had less ridership whereas today that is not the case.

You answered the question perfectly. It amazes me how many posters praise the NTTs to high heaven while those of us who've operated most types of equipment laugh silently at them. When I saw the 110A and 110B I turned to a senior RTO supervisor and said that the (MTA) was blowing smoke by using cosmetics as an "improvement". Obviously many people swallowed that line. I've seen posts on this site as well as other sites and I shake my head at the naivete of some folks. I, personally, know of no M/M or T/O who would ever rate an NTT as a better operating machine compared to SMEE equipment. The NTTs major pluses in my book were more cab comfort, better seating and more room, and the relative isolation from interior car distractions. NTTs were built to provide passenger amenities and they do a good job at that but operational wise they are inferior to pre-overhauled SMEE equipment. Slow, safe, and smooth seems to be the idea today. Just my opinion though. Carry on.

Edited by Trainmaster5
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You answered the question perfectly. It amazes me how many posters praise the NTTs to high heaven while those of us who've operated most types of equipment laugh silently at them. When I saw the 110A and 110B I turned to a senior RTO supervisor and said that the (MTA) was blowing smoke by using cosmetics as an "improvement". Obviously many people swallowed that line. I've seen posts on this site as well as other sites and I shake my head at the naivete of some folks. I, personally, know of no M/M or T/O who would ever rate an NTT as a better operating machine compared to SMEE equipment. The NTTs major pluses in my book were more cab comfort, better seating and more room, and the relative isolation from interior car distractions. NTTs were built to provide passenger amenities and they do a good job at that but operational wise they are inferior to pre-overhauled SMEE equipment. Slow, safe, and smooth seems to be the idea today. Just my opinion though. Carry on.

 

Besides digital signs and automated announcements what amenities do they have? I'm not sure about them, I find them underwhelming. The R160 seems the best of the bunch but let it get more miles before I can say so for sure. The 142As aren't impressive at all and only what, 13 yrs in service?

 

I don't know how well they can do at speed because they rarely go at speed and they all make those pitchy NTT whiny sounds at lower speeds. In the tunnels, the 143 L's used to move swiftly. But they are beginning to get that wearing out sense, like more vibration and feeling juddery. At speed, the 68s and 46s in decent shape are more fluid, the 62s and 62As aren't bad either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Besides digital signs and automated announcements what amenities do they have? I'm not sure about them, I find them underwhelming. The R160 seems the best of the bunch but let it get more miles before I can say so for sure. The 142As aren't impressive at all and only what, 13 yrs in service?

 

I don't know how well they can do at speed because they rarely go at speed and they all make those pitchy NTT whiny sounds at lower speeds. In the tunnels, the 143 L's used to move swiftly. But they are beginning to get that wearing out sense, like more vibration and feeling juddery. At speed, the 68s and 46s in decent shape are more fluid, the 62s and 62As aren't bad either.

Your first and last sentences sum up my general opinion of all NTTs. It's the new, shiny factor that the (MTA) and it's PR machine unleashed on the general public and especially the "railfan community". If you listen to some of them the car classes you mentioned are too old, dimly lit, dirty, and slow. With all their "so-called" knowledge they ignore what many RTO employees have pointed out ,that the older cars were intentionally slowed down due to Federal safety concerns with the installed signal system. The widespread use of signal timers throughout the system today is a direct result of those safety findings. The NTT car classes as delivered were slower than the SMEE cars you mentioned. Give the public better lighting, digital signage, automated announcements and maybe no on will notice that their commute was a little longer. While the overzealous railfan drools over which cars are coupled to each other and which line they run on Mr. and Mrs. Commuter are finding that 5 or 10 minute longer daily ride is hitting them in the pocketbook. Now, with the delayed arrival of newer NTT equipment the riders will have more time to contemplate their slower commutes on old SMEE  or newer NTT ( R142-R160) which will be shinier but just as slow. Funny thing is that there are posters on these threads that think some advocacy group is going to force the (MTA) to change equipment assignments so their commutes won't suffer at somebody else's expense. BSmith I'm happy to have found someone who hasn't been suckered by the smoke and mirrors. That fare people pay ( and complain about ) only entitles one to a ride, period. There is no guarantee of a seat,comfort, AC, or speed. That goes for (MTA) bus, subway, or commuter rail .I used to talk to my regular riders and it always amazed me that so many people thought that paying ones fare entitled one to something more than a ride. My rant. Carry on.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your first and last sentences sum up my general opinion of all NTTs. It's the new, shiny factor that the (MTA) and it's PR machine unleashed on the general public and especially the "railfan community". If you listen to some of them the car classes you mentioned are too old, dimly lit, dirty, and slow. With all their "so-called" knowledge they ignore what many RTO employees have pointed out ,that the older cars were intentionally slowed down due to Federal safety concerns with the installed signal system. The widespread use of signal timers throughout the system today is a direct result of those safety findings. The NTT car classes as delivered were slower than the SMEE cars you mentioned. Give the public better lighting, digital signage, automated announcements and maybe no on will notice that their commute was a little longer. While the overzealous railfan drools over which cars are coupled to each other and which line they run on Mr. and Mrs. Commuter are finding that 5 or 10 minute longer daily ride is hitting them in the pocketbook. Now, with the delayed arrival of newer NTT equipment the riders will have more time to contemplate their slower commutes on old SMEE  or newer NTT ( R142-R160) which will be shinier but just as slow. Funny thing is that there are posters on these threads that think some advocacy group is going to force the (MTA) to change equipment assignments so their commutes won't suffer at somebody else's expense. BSmith I'm happy to have found someone who hasn't been suckered by the smoke and mirrors. That fare people pay ( and complain about ) only entitles one to a ride, period. There is no guarantee of a seat,comfort, AC, or speed. That goes for (MTA) bus, subway, or commuter rail .I used to talk to my regular riders and it always amazed me that so many people thought that paying ones fare entitled one to something more than a ride. My rant. Carry on.

I'll tell you one thing... If a passenger becomes sick on a subway or bus due to a lack of AC and they can sue the (MTA) for not providing adequate circulation you better believe that they will.  I don't like the way your comment comes across as if we're expecting too much.  It's the 21st century not the 18th century and we should expect something for our money. Our tax dollars are paying for these trains and when I get on one I think it's reasonable to expect audible announcements, clean cars, climate control, good lighting etc., just like you expected certain things as a worker.

 

It's this mentality that is leading to the system overall becoming worse.  We should NEVER expect anything more but the bare bones, and GOD FORBID if the (MTA) does more than that.  Just keep raising the fare and get nothing back in return and the (MTA) workers can keep claiming that they need more and more raises because the cost of living keeps going up.  Typical but not surprising.

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ VG8

 You may not like the way my comment comes across. I can live with that. I would suggest that the next time you purchase a fare for transport on the (MTA) be cognizant of what's commonly called "the rules of carriage". It's actually common for most modes of transport in the U.S. Airlines, Greyhound, Amtrak, what have you. Basically what it boils down to is the carrier is providing you transport between point A and point B. That's it. While you and I would expect AC, a comfortable seat, maybe a refreshment or something extra that's something that we imply but it's not guaranteed unless you and I travel in our own vehicle. It doesn't matter what century we live in if the basic framework for transport in the country hasn't changed in 100 years or so. I fly between NY and NC about twice a month and I've had many a talk with travelers from across the country while at Charlotte-Douglas airport. I've heard the complaints from business travelers, casual folk like myself, workers from other US transit agencies. Flight delays,missed connections, poor AC, lost luggage, whatever. It makes no difference because XYZ airline got you from point A to point B. Not in a timely manner but the only thing that's actionable is the lost baggage one and that's only up to a certain dollar amount from the airline. I've always considered you a knowledgeable type but I sometimes wonder about you. Right here in NYC the Feds and the (MTA) are sparring over the LIRR's Cannonball from Penn Station out to Montauk. You do realize that people are paying a premium for reserved seating on what's a commuter train? Or that other riders are paying Peak fares for a ride on the same train with no guarantee of a seat ? People standing or sitting on the floor for most of their trip. Are you suggesting that they have the right to sue, or get a refund? Better still when NJT, MNRR, or the LIRR have these delays going into Penn Station or Grand Central do those carriers refund a portion of your commutation ticket? Usually no although they can if they're so inclined. It's good PR. Going back to your original premise. If a passenger feels sick because of a lack of AC why not move to another car or disembark from the bus? Since you and I have the power to vote I suggest the matter should be conveyed to our US Senators, Congressmen/women and our state representatives. Of course we'll be butting heads with the transportation lobbyists in Washington and the so-far unindicted lawmakers up in Albany but unless the rules are changed you won't win a suit against a US carrier. Doesn't matter if you paid a premium fare on an airline ( First Class) or a commuter railroad or a cheap seat all it means is a ride. Before you go  off into a rant against the (MTA) or it's workforce maybe you should direct your barbs toward the lawyers and lawmakers upstate and in DC. Sometimes I wonder about you. A world class traveler who doesn't know what his commutation ticket legally entitles him to ?  This ain't Europe. C'mon man. I'm sure you can do better than that. No hard feelings. Back to the subject at hand, slow subways. Carry on.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as you are correct, I find the "This ain't Europe" comment interesting. While some European transit systems are more efficient and cleaner, many also have old rolling stock in their fleets. If you go to London and start demanding that they retire rolling stock that is still efficient and usable because you don't like their A/C systems or interiors, they wouldn't be any more receptive than people here would be. Or if you tried to sue them because there were delays, because you couldn't get a seat, etc. etc. Otherwise, you are spot on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as you are correct, I find the "This ain't Europe" comment interesting. While some European transit systems are more efficient and cleaner, many also have old rolling stock in their fleets. If you go to London and start demanding that they retire rolling stock that is still efficient and usable because you don't like their A/C systems or interiors, they wouldn't be any more receptive than people here would be. Or if you tried to sue them because there were delays, because you couldn't get a seat, etc. etc. Otherwise, you are spot on.

In Europe, Europeans sure as hell don't accept the status quo.  I experienced plenty of strikes and protests of the transportation system throughout Italy.  

 

@ VG8

 You may not like the way my comment comes across. I can live with that. I would suggest that the next time you purchase a fare for transport on the (MTA) be cognizant of what's commonly called "the rules of carriage". It's actually common for most modes of transport in the U.S. Airlines, Greyhound, Amtrak, what have you. Basically what it boils down to is the carrier is providing you transport between point A and point B. That's it. While you and I would expect AC, a comfortable seat, maybe a refreshment or something extra that's something that we imply but it's not guaranteed unless you and I travel in our own vehicle. It doesn't matter what century we live in if the basic framework for transport in the country hasn't changed in 100 years or so. I fly between NY and NC about twice a month and I've had many a talk with travelers from across the country while at Charlotte-Douglas airport. I've heard the complaints from business travelers, casual folk like myself, workers from other US transit agencies. Flight delays,missed connections, poor AC, lost luggage, whatever. It makes no difference because XYZ airline got you from point A to point B. Not in a timely manner but the only thing that's actionable is the lost baggage one and that's only up to a certain dollar amount from the airline. I've always considered you a knowledgeable type but I sometimes wonder about you. Right here in NYC the Feds and the (MTA) are sparring over the LIRR's Cannonball from Penn Station out to Montauk. You do realize that people are paying a premium for reserved seating on what's a commuter train? Or that other riders are paying Peak fares for a ride on the same train with no guarantee of a seat ? People standing or sitting on the floor for most of their trip. Are you suggesting that they have the right to sue, or get a refund? Better still when NJT, MNRR, or the LIRR have these delays going into Penn Station or Grand Central do those carriers refund a portion of your commutation ticket? Usually no although they can if they're so inclined. It's good PR. Going back to your original premise. If a passenger feels sick because of a lack of AC why not move to another car or disembark from the bus? Since you and I have the power to vote I suggest the matter should be conveyed to our US Senators, Congressmen/women and our state representatives. Of course we'll be butting heads with the transportation lobbyists in Washington and the so-far unindicted lawmakers up in Albany but unless the rules are changed you won't win a suit against a US carrier. Doesn't matter if you paid a premium fare on an airline ( First Class) or a commuter railroad or a cheap seat all it means is a ride. Before you go  off into a rant against the (MTA) or it's workforce maybe you should direct your barbs toward the lawyers and lawmakers upstate and in DC. Sometimes I wonder about you. A world class traveler who doesn't know what his commutation ticket legally entitles him to ?  This ain't Europe. C'mon man. I'm sure you can do better than that. No hard feelings. Back to the subject at hand, slow subways. Carry on.

Actually wasn't legislation passed not that long ago to force airlines to do something about having passengers sit on the tarmac for lengthy periods of time with no explanation or anything of the sort? I had a flight years ago that was a mess from Rome to Frankfurt and it was the airlines (Alitalia) that caused me to miss my Lufthansa connection and fly out the next morning. The airline originally offered us a hotel for the night for the inconvenience since there weren't that many of us making that connection to get back to JFK, but decided against it later.  

 

For what it's worth, I wouldn't be surprised if legislation wasn't looked at down the road to force the (MTA) to enact procedures to ensure more that the service they provided was more efficient.  NYC Comptroller Scott Stringer published a report about how atrocious express bus service was across the city and how few buses were actually on time and urged the (MTA) to do something to correct the problem aside from saying that they can't do anything.   I would expect to see something similar for the subway system as well, as it continues to be a mess.

 

I am part of the younger generation that will be far more vocal about transportation issues in this city and in general.  The younger population is more inclined to use public transportation as we're seeing across the city, and we WILL be vocal about expecting better service for our money.  I'm certainly not going to sit by and keep coughing up hundreds of dollars a month and accept any old service because of some "status quo" <_<.  Just not going to happen.  You wouldn't go to a restaurant and be given any old order and then pay as if everything was ok.  Why should commuters expect and tolerate subpar service?

 

For example, I applaud NJ Transit commuters for getting on NJ Transit AND the Governor for not doing their part in providing better service.  The other day, my colleague had a THREE HOUR commute one way from New Jersey to our Midtown office.  To say that she was pissed is an understatement, and if commuters don't speak out against these things the situation will only become worse. I am in contact with my local leaders regularly about transportation issues here in Riverdale because I'm well aware of the fact of how important transportation is to a community having lost vital service in my old neighborhood just a few years ago.

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your first and last sentences sum up my general opinion of all NTTs. It's the new, shiny factor that the (MTA) and it's PR machine unleashed on the general public and especially the "railfan community". If you listen to some of them the car classes you mentioned are too old, dimly lit, dirty, and slow. With all their "so-called" knowledge they ignore what many RTO employees have pointed out ,that the older cars were intentionally slowed down due to Federal safety concerns with the installed signal system. The widespread use of signal timers throughout the system today is a direct result of those safety findings. The NTT car classes as delivered were slower than the SMEE cars you mentioned. Give the public better lighting, digital signage, automated announcements and maybe no on will notice that their commute was a little longer. While the overzealous railfan drools over which cars are coupled to each other and which line they run on Mr. and Mrs. Commuter are finding that 5 or 10 minute longer daily ride is hitting them in the pocketbook. Now, with the delayed arrival of newer NTT equipment the riders will have more time to contemplate their slower commutes on old SMEE  or newer NTT ( R142-R160) which will be shinier but just as slow. Funny thing is that there are posters on these threads that think some advocacy group is going to force the (MTA) to change equipment assignments so their commutes won't suffer at somebody else's expense. BSmith I'm happy to have found someone who hasn't been suckered by the smoke and mirrors. That fare people pay ( and complain about ) only entitles one to a ride, period. There is no guarantee of a seat,comfort, AC, or speed. That goes for (MTA) bus, subway, or commuter rail .I used to talk to my regular riders and it always amazed me that so many people thought that paying ones fare entitled one to something more than a ride. My rant. Carry on.

 

I agree with everything you said. As far as the "old school person" in me goes, I could really care less about how fancy or dazzling an NTT subway car looks like or how fast they move. Personally I don't find them that all-inspiring their just rapid subway cars with new millennium appliances that even some riders could take for granted. Thats just my opinion.

Already I've been on an R188 (7) train with the digital display sign and the light indicater under the (7) LOCAL on the stripmap clearly above were I was seating to have one person ask me if the train is going express or local to Main St. My point is that some riders don't even bother to take a few minutes let alone few seconds to look at the displays and try to learn or understand a certain subway routes journey or destination especially if there close by to see if the trains going Local or Express even on the NTTs. It seems as a conductor as loud as the IC can be and as very informative you try to be to riders, sometimes the service information comes in one ear and quickly goes out other.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Europe, Europeans sure as hell don't accept the status quo.  I experienced plenty of strikes and protests of the transportation system throughout Italy.  

 

And how many of these were because of old but still very usable rolling stock, and how many of these were because of actual concerns about insufficient service levels and inefficiencies?

 

For what it's worth, when I visited Italy 2 years back I wasn't too impressed with their transit system. I rode one of those double decker train things from Mestre to Venice and back (I believe the operator was Trenitalia), and they certainly weren't any cleaner than your average subway car in New York. I found it acceptable, but definitely not anything over the top worth writing home about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And how many of these were because of old but still very usable rolling stock, and how many of these were because of actual concerns about insufficient service levels and inefficiencies?

 

For what it's worth, when I visited Italy 2 years back I wasn't too impressed with their transit system. I rode one of those double decker train things from Mestre to Venice and back (I believe the operator was Trenitalia), and they certainly weren't any cleaner than your average subway car in New York. I found it acceptable, but definitely not anything over the top worth writing home about.

The Intercity trains are quite old and nothing great, but I used to use "EuroStar" (not the Euro Star from France to England (Paris to London)) which Trenitalia operated and it was great.  I had wonderful trips up to Bologna and Milan from Florence using that service.  Nice sleek trains, wonderful climate controlled cars and you have the option of ordering food etc.  I always got food on the way to Stazione Centrale anyway so I didn't care much about that.  The new service is now called "Frecciarossa" which is the high speed train making trips from places like Milan to Rome in under three hours.

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem as I see it is trying to graft a newer more efficient signal system onto a 100+ year old infrastructure. I'm speaking of CBTC tech and it's implementation. It's been tested on the isolated (L) and a different version is slated for the (7). The real test will be on the Queens Blvd IND corridor as far as I'm concerned. If it works successfully on that section of the IND perhaps there is hope for the rest of IND-BMT lines. Let's be clear about this though. This may speed up the commute somewhat in that segment of the (E), (F), (M), and (R) lines but those lines also travel over much more trackage not covered by CBTC initially. That (R) rider waiting at Steinway St for a train might be okay if he's heading toward Manhattan but if he's heading in the other direction the initial CBTC rollout ain't gonna help him because that train is going to suffer the same delays it does today. Moving over to my IRT the only hope I see for the Lexington Avenue corridor is the eventual opening of the SAS to ease the overcrowding on the Upper East Side. Before I retired the IRT introduced a  computerized system called ATS which, in theory, was supposed to speed things up. Before the system came online I could leave Dyre Avenue at 3 pm, in a Redbird, and arrive at Bowling Green at 3:55 pm on time. When ATS first came online I could leave Dyre Avenue at the exact same time in an R142, give radio checks at Gun Hill, Morris Park, Freeman St, Jackson Avenue to RCC on time, yet after leaving 149th St-GC lower on time I would be 5 minutes late reaching 125th and Lex and 8 minutes late at Bowling Green. This happened every day, 5 days a week unless the ATS system was turned off at 149th St-GC and the local dispatcher and tower operator gave me the line-up. That's why I try to warn you folks to not get so hung up on these newer computerized systems. Theory and the real world are two different things. My rant. Carry on.

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem as I see it is trying to graft a newer more efficient signal system onto a 100+ year old infrastructure. I'm speaking of CBTC tech and it's implementation. It's been tested on the isolated (L) and a different version is slated for the (7). The real test will be on the Queens Blvd IND corridor as far as I'm concerned. If it works successfully on that section of the IND perhaps there is hope for the rest of IND-BMT lines. Let's be clear about this though. This may speed up the commute somewhat in that segment of the (E), (F), (M), and (R) lines but those lines also travel over much more trackage not covered by CBTC initially. That (R) rider waiting at Steinway St for a train might be okay if he's heading toward Manhattan but if he's heading in the other direction the initial CBTC rollout ain't gonna help him because that train is going to suffer the same delays it does today. Moving over to my IRT the only hope I see for the Lexington Avenue corridor is the eventual opening of the SAS to ease the overcrowding on the Upper East Side. Before I retired the IRT introduced a computerized system called ATS which, in theory, was supposed to speed things up. Before the system came online I could leave Dyre Avenue at 3 pm, in a Redbird, and arrive at Bowling Green at 3:55 pm on time. When ATS first came online I could leave Dyre Avenue at the exact same time in an R142, give radio checks at Gun Hill, Morris Park, Freeman St, Jackson Avenue to RCC on time, yet after leaving 149th St-GC lower on time I would be 5 minutes late reaching 125th and Lex and 8 minutes late at Bowling Green. This happened every day, 5 days a week unless the ATS system was turned off at 149th St-GC and the local dispatcher and tower operator gave me the line-up. That's why I try to warn you folks to not get so hung up on these newer computerized systems. Theory and the real world are two different things. My rant. Carry on.

I agree with you on that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My only wonder is how long would it take until CBTC is fully activated on the Queens Blvd line. It took about six years if I'm wrong or not on the (L) & currently now on the (7) and those are self-subway lines.

Edited by jon2305

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When CBTC hits the Queens Blvd line is it only going to be for Queens alone or for the rest of the lines they travel on such as 6th Ave/Culver (F) Broadway®, Myrtle(M) and 8th Ave (E)? If it is only for Queens for now aren't those trains going to hit delays once they reach Manhattan and Brooklyn. If CBTC is all about making the commute faster and allowing more service I can see the (E) and (R) suffering the most since they share a line with a non CBTC route in Manhattan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When CBTC hits the Queens Blvd line is it only going to be for Queens alone or for the rest of the lines they travel on such as 6th Ave/Culver (F) Broadway®, Myrtle(M) and 8th Ave (E)? If it is only for Queens for now aren't those trains going to hit delays once they reach Manhattan and Brooklyn. If CBTC is all about making the commute faster and allowing more service I can see the (E) and (R) suffering the most since they share a line with a non CBTC route in Manhattan.

It will only go up the 50th Street/8th Ave on the (E) and 47/50th Rockefeller Center on the (F) & (M) lines. The (R) I assume would end CBTC around Queens Plaza.

Edited by trainfan22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When CBTC hits the Queens Blvd line is it only going to be for Queens alone or for the rest of the lines they travel on such as 6th Ave/Culver (F) Broadway®, Myrtle(M) and 8th Ave (E)? If it is only for Queens for now aren't those trains going to hit delays once they reach Manhattan and Brooklyn. If CBTC is all about making the commute faster and allowing more service I can see the (E) and (R) suffering the most since they share a line with a non CBTC route in Manhattan.

 

Not necessarily. In the best case scenario the QB express gets upgraded from 30 to 40 TPH. That leaves 20 TPH for each train line. If the (E) and (F) split that evenly, that still leaves 10TPH for trains they share tracks with on non-CBTC track, and that should be enough for the (M), (G), and (C). (The (R) and (M) are likely not going to see their capacity boosted much, if at all, since the main limit on their track capacity is the fumigation of trains at Forest Hills.)

Edited by bobtehpanda
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not necessarily. In the best case scenario the QB express gets upgraded from 30 to 40 TPH. That leaves 20 TPH for each train line. If the (E) and (F) split that evenly, that still leaves 10TPH for trains they share tracks with on non-CBTC track, and that should be enough for the (M), (G), and (C). (The (R) and (M) are likely not going to see their capacity boosted much, if at all, since the main limit on their track capacity is the fumigation of trains at Forest Hills.)

If the M and R were extended to 179th, I imagine the same problems would arise.

If the M were extended via the RBB, the problem would be gone.

Not necessarily. In the best case scenario the QB express gets upgraded from 30 to 40 TPH. That leaves 20 TPH for each train line. If the (E) and (F) split that evenly, that still leaves 10TPH for trains they share tracks with on non-CBTC track, and that should be enough for the (M), (G), and (C). (The (R) and (M) are likely not going to see their capacity boosted much, if at all, since the main limit on their track capacity is the fumigation of trains at Forest Hills.)

Also wouldn't the JC terminal constrain the E?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is there such a problem turning trains around at Forest Hills?

Has anyone ever been on an (R)(M) when it was turning around because I thought the trains go onto a lower level and loop back onto the Manhattan and before it does it waits in the tunnel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is there such a problem turning trains around at Forest Hills?

Has anyone ever been on an (R)(M) when it was turning around because I thought the trains go onto a lower level and loop back onto the Manhattan and before it does it waits in the tunnel.

they don't loop.

They relay.

The train goes onto the relay track. The T/O in the back (originally) drives the train over a switch to the other relay track which leads to the Manhattan bound track.

The problem is due to fumigation procedures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they don't loop.

They relay.

The train goes onto the relay track. The T/O in the back (originally) drives the train over a switch to the other relay track which leads to the Manhattan bound track.

The problem is due to fumigation procedures.

Operate...They OPERATE trains

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is there such a problem turning trains around at Forest Hills?

Has anyone ever been on an (R)(M) when it was turning around because I thought the trains go onto a lower level and loop back onto the Manhattan and before it does it waits in the tunnel.

 

For various reasons they have to make sure no one is still in the train when it goes down to the lower level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know they call the (R) Romeo and idk what the (M) is called at 71st Ave. Yeah I realized they make everyone leave so you don't get a free ride like you do on the (6) looping around City Hall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know they call the (R) Romeo and idk what the (M) is called at 71st Ave. Yeah I realized they make everyone leave so you don't get a free ride like you do on the (6) looping around City Hall.

(M)...Mary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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