By pure guestimation, when do you think the subway will be fully equipped with CBTC and a NTT fleet?

[bobtehpanda]

Let me rephrase:

 

CBTC is a way of boosting TPH right? It has worked so far with the and the because they are both independent lines. If the MTA is going to install CBTC on a line like Broadway, 7th Av or Lex Av, it's gonna be to complex because you have more then 4 different lines on each one. And remember, if there's a mechanical malfunction, the whole line stalls, which causes more delays and whatnot. This is why I think the and should have CBTC only, and thats it. Besides, in a couple of years a new signaling system is gonna come out and everyones gonna forget about CBTC. 

 

CBTC isn't a brand, in the same way that "electric car" isn't a brand; it's a type of technology. Unless we somehow get something more advanced in trains than trains communicating their positions with other trains in real-time, it's very improbable, if not impossible, that CBTC will be supplanted by something new, especially since it has been about as far as signalling technology has gone for the past 35 years. (CBTC actually dates from the '80s.)

 

Keep in mind that the existing signal system is also prone to malfunctions leading to delays that ripple throughout the system. How many times do trains get diverted on non-CBTC lines due to a "signal problem"?

[Fresh Pond]

Let me rephrase:

 

CBTC is a way of boosting TPH right? It has worked so far with the and the because they are both independent lines. If the MTA is going to install CBTC on a line like Broadway, 7th Av or Lex Av, it's gonna be to complex because you have more then 4 different lines on each one. And remember, if there's a mechanical malfunction, the whole line stalls, which causes more delays and whatnot. This is why I think the and should have CBTC only, and thats it. Besides, in a couple of years a new signaling system is gonna come out and everyones gonna forget about CBTC.

Lolwut

[SubwayGuy]

Actually Javier is actually correct. If you're going to install CBTC on a line like Bway-7th Ave, it would need to be done in several contracts.

 

96th to 242nd (1 line)

96th to South Ferry local tracks (1 line) to Nevins express tracks (2/3 lines)

148th to 96th (2/3 lines)

Nevins to Flatbush/Utica (2/3 lines) - might as well do all 4 tracks

135th to White Plains (2 line)

 

This would also partially involve the Lexington Avenue 4 and 5 trains. So, when implementing CBTC on Lex, you would need contracts for Pelham to 125th St. (6 line)

Woodlawn to 125th St. (4 line)

Dyre to East 180th (5 line, then this would merge into the then-existing 2 line CBTC system from 180 to 149/Concourse)

149/Concourse to the then-existing 4 line CBTC system north of 138/Concourse (5 line connection to east side)

125th St. to Brooklyn Bridge, all 4 tracks (4/5/6 lines)

Brooklyn Bridge to Nevins (4/5 lines)

Bowling Green loop (for the 5, must be compatible with the CBTC system for the 1 at South Ferry)

 

Due to interlining, each adjacent system must be able to communicate with its neighbor(s) for reroutes, or even simple handoff of trains from one system to another.

 

And this is using the A Division, which is far simpler, as an example, vs. using the B Division.

 

Partial implementation requires trains to operate into and out of CBTC territory which involves coming to a complete stop. So anything you add in time savings, you give back in transitions into and out of CBTC territory.

 

It's a waste of money in NYC, and a lot of people who know what they are talking about feel similarly. However new technology sells to government officials, so it will remain the flavor of the moment

[jon2305]

new technology sells to government officials, so it will remain the flavor of the moment...

 

It's all about a thing of convenience and how the "powers at be" can make it all work. As we move futher into this modern era of the 21st Century, the more fancy and sophisticated gadgets that come out into the market the more people become blind to the fact of how "cool" it looks but instead should stop and think how it would benefit anyone or anything going forward. I guess time will tell and with subway ridership continue to rise, eventually the proof will be in the pudding.

[bobtehpanda]

Actually Javier is actually correct. If you're going to install CBTC on a line like Bway-7th Ave, it would need to be done in several contracts.

 

96th to 242nd (1 line)

96th to South Ferry local tracks (1 line) to Nevins express tracks (2/3 lines)

148th to 96th (2/3 lines)

Nevins to Flatbush/Utica (2/3 lines) - might as well do all 4 tracks

135th to White Plains (2 line)

 

This would also partially involve the Lexington Avenue 4 and 5 trains. So, when implementing CBTC on Lex, you would need contracts for Pelham to 125th St. (6 line)

Woodlawn to 125th St. (4 line)

Dyre to East 180th (5 line, then this would merge into the then-existing 2 line CBTC system from 180 to 149/Concourse)

149/Concourse to the then-existing 4 line CBTC system north of 138/Concourse (5 line connection to east side)

125th St. to Brooklyn Bridge, all 4 tracks (4/5/6 lines)

Brooklyn Bridge to Nevins (4/5 lines)

Bowling Green loop (for the 5, must be compatible with the CBTC system for the 1 at South Ferry)

 

Due to interlining, each adjacent system must be able to communicate with its neighbor(s) for reroutes, or even simple handoff of trains from one system to another.

 

And this is using the A Division, which is far simpler, as an example, vs. using the B Division.

 

Partial implementation requires trains to operate into and out of CBTC territory which involves coming to a complete stop. So anything you add in time savings, you give back in transitions into and out of CBTC territory.

 

It's a waste of money in NYC, and a lot of people who know what they are talking about feel similarly. However new technology sells to government officials, so it will remain the flavor of the moment

 

Isn't the Queens Blvd Line from 8th Avenue to 179th St already one contract? That has several segments, similar to the Broadway-7th Av Line. If we can do it once, we can do it again. And if the transition requires a full stop, why can't it be done in a station?

 

You have 8th to 6th Avenue, 6th Av to Queens Plaza, 21 St-Queensbridge/Queens Plaza to Forest Hills, and then Forest Hills to Briarwood-Van Wyck, and finally either Briarwood-Van Wyck to 179 St, or to Jamaica Center.

[SubwayGuy]

Isn't the Queens Blvd Line from 8th Avenue to 179th St already one contract? That has several segments, similar to the Broadway-7th Av Line. If we can do it once, we can do it again. And if the transition requires a full stop, why can't it be done in a station?

 

Never said it couldn't be. However the station needs to have a home signal at the leaving end and be a boundary for the CBTC area.

 

As for the number of contracts it's irrelevant. Industry standard software is being updated constantly. Longer contracts take longer to complete = more obsolescence when discussing compatibility with the "next" contract system. Shorter contracts complete faster, but you still have the same long time to complete the whole thing = more obsolescence/intercompatibility issues.

 

Queens Blvd. would have to interface with 3 different corridors in order to hand trains off properly when the whole thing is complete - 6th Avenue, 8th Avenue, and Broadway. Plus you'd want intercomptability with the G (Crosstown) for moves between Court Sq. and Queens Plaza, although it's not critical. They'd have to talk to Queens Blvd AND to each other (8th/6th interline at W4 and Jay, 6th/Bway interline at DeKalb).

 

You have 8th to 6th Avenue, 6th Av to Queens Plaza, 21 St-Queensbridge/Queens Plaza to Forest Hills, and then Forest Hills to Briarwood-Van Wyck, and finally either Briarwood-Van Wyck to 179 St, or to Jamaica Center.

 

Do you really think all of that is going to be completed in time that what is discussed for later segments will even be remotely close to the same thing? This is like talking about modernizing the fleet in 1948 and buying 10 R10's every other year.

new technology sells to government officials, so it will remain the flavor of the moment...

 

It's all about a thing of convenience and how the "powers at be" can make it all work. As we move futher into this modern era of the 21st Century, the more fancy and sophisticated gadgets that come out into the market the more people become blind to the fact of how "cool" it looks but instead should stop and think how it would benefit anyone or anything going forward. I guess time will tell and with subway ridership continue to rise, eventually the proof will be in the pudding.

 

Yup, and it's sad. It's why people will blindly line up and throw away all their hard earned money because an iPhone with a higher number just came out. But meanwhile, are those features really that amazing and mind boggling that they dramatically improve the quality of your life?

 

Never mind what better things that research effort could be spent on other than making a screen smaller or a processor slightly faster...

 

Unfortunately all of society suffers from this same blind subservience to new and often unproven technology, and it affects capital funding decisions as the tried and true, or the simple solution, is rarely chosen.