Jump to content

Systemwide CBTC - Planning and Implementation


Union Tpke

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, RTOMan said:

Prob Schoolcar wasn't a revenue train.. No R46s in Queens...

Unless this is a Old Pic.

I wanted to think the same thing, but people have said they rode it, something about a malfunction along the 60 St tunnel forcing this train to be rerouted or something. Who knows for sure though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 433
  • Created
  • Last Reply
3 hours ago, Vulturious said:

I wanted to think the same thing, but people have said they rode it, something about a malfunction along the 60 St tunnel forcing this train to be rerouted or something. Who knows for sure though.

They should have just turned it at Queens Plaza using the pocket track so the train wouldn’t get trapped deep all the way in CBTC territory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the protocol and signaling for non-CBTC trains in CBTC territory?  Are they just longer blocks, very long blocks, with standard signaling?  does the flashing green turn solid green to allow the train through?  Do all other trains then have to wait for it to clear the block?  Are the blocks from one station to the next? 

I'm still trying to process how all this works.  Is there a knowledgeable writeup out there somewhere?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, zacster said:

What is the protocol and signaling for non-CBTC trains in CBTC territory?  Are they just longer blocks, very long blocks, with standard signaling?  does the flashing green turn solid green to allow the train through?  Do all other trains then have to wait for it to clear the block?  Are the blocks from one station to the next? 

I'm still trying to process how all this works.  Is there a knowledgeable writeup out there somewhere?

You just answered your own question heh...

Now i do believe the MTA has some kind of explanation on their website about CBTC you can take a look at their site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/2/2022 at 5:12 PM, Vulturious said:

I wanted to think the same thing, but people have said they rode it, something about a malfunction along the 60 St tunnel forcing this train to be rerouted or something. Who knows for sure though.

Ah now i can see that happening...Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, RTOMan said:

You just answered your own question heh...

Now i do believe the MTA has some kind of explanation on their website about CBTC you can take a look at their site.

Thanks.  That's what I figured it had to be but didn't really know.  I looked on the MTA website and there was some information but there isn't much else I can find as it pertains to the subway.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The same Youtube channel that posted the video above posted another video with New flashing red over flashing red signal aspects at Ave X. The description and comments say that the flashing does not change the signal's stop indication, but is a reminder to punch for a route, and the flashing stops once punched. Can anyone else confirm this, and if more signals will have this aspect in the future?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, RestrictOnTheHanger said:

The same Youtube channel that posted the video above posted another video with New flashing red over flashing red signal aspects at Ave X. The description and comments say that the flashing does not change the signal's stop indication, but is a reminder to punch for a route, and the flashing stops once punched. Can anyone else confirm this, and if more signals will have this aspect in the future?

 

Yes you have to punch that just lets Tower C know you there so the right line up can be given this is only for when a train is coming out of the yard...

Yet the signals have been acting up and trains have been getting tripped so basically most trains just sit out side the station until the full line up is fleeted in..

Why it acts up like that No idea someone prob  effed up in the wiring(oh what a surprise a Contractor doing something stupid) the Supt to told me...

Once CBTC comes online down there this procedure wont be in effect.

BTW they running  CBTC test trains every night and they'll be doing it this weekend.

Edited by RTOMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Sorry for necro-posting but Just a thought: what if CBTC installation is accelerated for 6th Av (which I assume will follow 8 Av) by doing the following.

- 2-3 month closure of the 6 Av Line 24/7 and the following service reroutes

 

(A) trains to/from Lefferts Blvd make local stops in Brooklyn

(B) trains run from Brighton Beach to DeKalb Av, then via the (Q) to/from 96 St weekdays 

(C) trains run only from 168 St to World Trade Center. 

(D) trains run from Norwood-205 St to 59 St-Columbus Circle, then via the (A) to/from Jay St MetroTech, then via the (F) to/from Stillwell Av

(F) trains run from Jamaica-179 St to Lexington Av-63 St, then via the (Q) to/from Atlantic Av-Barclays Center, then via the (D) to/from Stillwell Av

(M) trains would run from Metropolitan Av to Essex St, then to/from Chambers St via the (J) 

(N) trains run via the (R) between 57 St-7 Av and Atlantic Av-Barclays Center

(W) trains suspended 

 

some minor scheduling changes

(B) Trains would run every 10 minutes more or less throughout the day, particularly in the reverse-peak direction (towards Brighton Beach in the AM and towards 96 St in the PM, with the extra trains stored in the layup track north of 96 St which can store two trains each). Extra cars would shift to the (D).

(D) trains would run every 5 minutes along the entire route both directions (Cranberry St would have enough room for the (A)(D) at this point). All trains would make local stops north of 145 St but alternating trains would also make local stops along Central Park West only, then resume express service on 8 Av, mimicking a (B) service. A couple of extra (D) trains could be added in the peak direction coming from Bronx in the AM and headed up to 205 St in the afternoon, since the rush hour frequency of the (A) dominates going uptown AM and downtown PM. The (D) would do the opposite.

(C) train frequencies would be every 12 minutes to not interfere with the (E) too much at World Trade Center. All (C) trains will be full length by this point. Extra cars shift to the (A).

(J) trains could run more frequent service since the (M) train cars would be available and provide alternatives to nearby stations on the (A) line near the Broadway Junction area.

(F) trains would run about every 4.5 minutes in the peak direction (towards Coney Island in the AM and towards 179 St in the PM). This would be possible since the (Q) would run 9 TPH and the (B) would run 6 TPH in that direction. The only reduction here would be the reverse peak (coming from West End in the AM, and going to Coney Island in the PM, since the (B) and (Q) need to run about 18 TPH in that direction, leaving only about 8-9 TPH space for the (F). If there are extra cars, they will go to the (R).

(N) Trains will provide local service, extra cars coming from the (W). Some rush hour (N) service could terminate at Whitehall St, so that only 9 TPH go to/from Brooklyn, and about 12 TPH go to Astoria.

(R) trains can provide additional rush hour service to run every 4 minutes (about 14 TPH, yes a decrease from the 19 TPH that run on the (M) and (R) combined, but all trains will be 600’feet, which can offset some of those reductions). 
 

if we make these adjustments especially with ridership where it is now, CBTC can be accelerated especially if done during a period of lower ridership (I.e summers and winters)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, darkstar8983 said:

Sorry for necro-posting but Just a thought: what if CBTC installation is accelerated for 6th Av (which I assume will follow 8 Av) by doing the following.

- 2-3 month closure of the 6 Av Line 24/7 and the following service reroutes

 

(A) trains to/from Lefferts Blvd make local stops in Brooklyn

(B) trains run from Brighton Beach to DeKalb Av, then via the (Q) to/from 96 St weekdays 

(C) trains run only from 168 St to World Trade Center. 

(D) trains run from Norwood-205 St to 59 St-Columbus Circle, then via the (A) to/from Jay St MetroTech, then via the (F) to/from Stillwell Av

(F) trains run from Jamaica-179 St to Lexington Av-63 St, then via the (Q) to/from Atlantic Av-Barclays Center, then via the (D) to/from Stillwell Av

(M) trains would run from Metropolitan Av to Essex St, then to/from Chambers St via the (J) 

(N) trains run via the (R) between 57 St-7 Av and Atlantic Av-Barclays Center

(W) trains suspended 

 

some minor scheduling changes

(B) Trains would run every 10 minutes more or less throughout the day, particularly in the reverse-peak direction (towards Brighton Beach in the AM and towards 96 St in the PM, with the extra trains stored in the layup track north of 96 St which can store two trains each). Extra cars would shift to the (D).

(D) trains would run every 5 minutes along the entire route both directions (Cranberry St would have enough room for the (A)(D) at this point). All trains would make local stops north of 145 St but alternating trains would also make local stops along Central Park West only, then resume express service on 8 Av, mimicking a (B) service. A couple of extra (D) trains could be added in the peak direction coming from Bronx in the AM and headed up to 205 St in the afternoon, since the rush hour frequency of the (A) dominates going uptown AM and downtown PM. The (D) would do the opposite.

(C) train frequencies would be every 12 minutes to not interfere with the (E) too much at World Trade Center. All (C) trains will be full length by this point. Extra cars shift to the (A).

(J) trains could run more frequent service since the (M) train cars would be available and provide alternatives to nearby stations on the (A) line near the Broadway Junction area.

(F) trains would run about every 4.5 minutes in the peak direction (towards Coney Island in the AM and towards 179 St in the PM). This would be possible since the (Q) would run 9 TPH and the (B) would run 6 TPH in that direction. The only reduction here would be the reverse peak (coming from West End in the AM, and going to Coney Island in the PM, since the (B) and (Q) need to run about 18 TPH in that direction, leaving only about 8-9 TPH space for the (F). If there are extra cars, they will go to the (R).

(N) Trains will provide local service, extra cars coming from the (W). Some rush hour (N) service could terminate at Whitehall St, so that only 9 TPH go to/from Brooklyn, and about 12 TPH go to Astoria.

(R) trains can provide additional rush hour service to run every 4 minutes (about 14 TPH, yes a decrease from the 19 TPH that run on the (M) and (R) combined, but all trains will be 600’feet, which can offset some of those reductions). 
 

if we make these adjustments especially with ridership where it is now, CBTC can be accelerated especially if done during a period of lower ridership (I.e summers and winters)

With the current equipment, this is how we could operate this service.

 

(A) - 110 R179 cars + 248 R46 cars = 42 trains total (4 extra trains for select local service in Brooklyn)

(B) - 152 R46 cars = 19 trains total (6 fewer trains needed due to Broadway reroute)

(C) - 88 R46 cars = 11 trains total (7 fewer trains needed due to shortened route length)

(D) - 320 R68 cars = 40 trains total (11 additional trains needed for service buff and increased route length)

(E) - 250 R160 cars = 25 trains total (one train subtracted from service requirement due to terminal sharing at World Trade Center with the (C) and reduced recovery time)

(F) - 370 R160 cars = 37 trains total (9 trains subtracted from service requirements due to reduced reverse peak direction service caused by track constraints on the Broadway Express track)

(G) - 112 R160 cars = 14 trains total (arranged as 8-car sets, taken from the (M) line due to 6 Av closure.

(J) - 152 R179 cars + 40 R160 cars = 24 trains total (4 additional trains added due to need to provide extra service along Jamaica Line adjacent to nearby Brooklyn (A) stations

(L) - 176 R143 cars + 40 R160 Cars = 27 trains total (3 additional trains due to need to add additional midtown service for (A) and (M) riders.

(M) - 80 R160 cars = 10 trains total (14 trains subtracted from service requirement due to 6 Av closure - cars shifted to (G) service)

(N) - 168 R68A cars + 64 R68 cars = 29 trains total (5 trains subtracted from service requirement due to (W) suspension and need to reduce Astoria/Manhattan service to provide additional (R) service. Additional trainsets will be used to provide local service via Lower Manhattan 

(Q) - 160 R46 cars = 20 trains total (one train set subtracted from service requirement due to sharing 96 St/2 Av terminal with the rerouted (B) 

(R) - 360 R160 cars = 36 trains total (five trains added to address Queens Blvd local service demand and improve Manhattan/Brooklyn service due to capacity constraints in Cranberry St tunnel)

 

*this was a rough approximation, In which the lines that had trainsets subtracted could have had MORE trains subtracted to account for track capacity constrains, and those that had trainsets added could have more trains added to address service pockets

Edited by darkstar8983
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me add to this..

They so far behind in installing of this it made the news...

Fingers are being pointed..

CBTC BIEs and MAL dropping out is a common thing along with non reporting trains tearing up the railroad..

Oh and as for the Culver Line?

LOL They effed up the trackage spec for the outside tracks so they talking maybe 2025 perhaps..

Edited by RTOMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RTOMan said:

Let me add to this..

They so far behind in installing of this it made the news...

Fingers are being pointed..

CBTC BIEs and MAL dropping out is a common thing along with non reporting trains tearing up the railroad..

Oh and as for the Culver Line?

LOL They effed up the trackage spec for the outside tracks so they talking maybe 2025 perhaps..

:D I remember that some people in the know told us that they were guessing 40 years for full implementation of the CBTC system in both divisions. Meanwhile John Q Public, including many posters, believe the press releases the agency puts out. Obviously many new projects have glitches at the beginning but this whole project is a big joke IMO. Carry on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh yeah!! I heard about the need to essentially re-do Culver. Perfect way to say F*** you Culver Line Riders - putting up with GOs since 2018 for installation only to have to wait for them to do it again. This is the perfect chance for transit to piggyback 6 Av and Culver together. The worst part is that ever since COVID, the Culver Link Shuttle Buses never happened and now whenever there is an (F) train GO south of Church Av, no shuttle buses are used.

Edited by darkstar8983
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Trainmaster5 said:

:D I remember that some people in the know told us that they were guessing 40 years for full implementation of the CBTC system in both divisions. Meanwhile John Q Public, including many posters, believe the press releases the agency puts out. Obviously many new projects have glitches at the beginning but this whole project is a big joke IMO. Carry on.

remember how long the (7) took and the need to cover up glitches that caused service to be suspended if ever there was precipitation? Classic MTA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Trainmaster5 said:

:D I remember that some people in the know told us that they were guessing 40 years for full implementation of the CBTC system in both divisions. Meanwhile John Q Public, including many posters, believe the press releases the agency puts out. Obviously many new projects have glitches at the beginning but this whole project is a big joke IMO. Carry on.

I remember when they started the installing  of CBTC on the Larry Line and Then MTA Big boss Peter(Top of the Rock) Kalikow was saying that they expected the whole system to be fully AUTOMATED by the Middle of the 2000s...

He is long retired along with his cast of loser characters and CBTC isn't even close to being done..

2026 cant come fast enough get me the eff outta here...

Edited by RTOMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, darkstar8983 said:

oh yeah!! I heard about the need to essentially re-do Culver. Perfect way to say F*** you Culver Line Riders - putting up with GOs since 2018 for installation only to have to wait for them to do it again. This is the perfect chance for transit to piggyback 6 Av and Culver together. The worst part is that ever since COVID, the Culver Link Shuttle Buses never happened and now whenever there is an (F) train GO south of Church Av, no shuttle buses are used.

Yep since COVID they stopped with the shuttle buses folks just gotta fend for themselves but they so used to it now nobody complains...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, darkstar8983 said:

remember how long the (7) took and the need to cover up glitches that caused service to be suspended if ever there was precipitation? Classic MTA

Whenever its rains the Culver Line just becomes a dead zone of signal issues..

Track Circuits all over....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.amny.com/transit/mta-contract-modernize-g-line-signals/

Quote

 

The G line is the forgotten stepchild, no more!

The MTA is set to approve a $368 million contract to install a modern communications-based train control (CBTC) signal system on the G line, which would make the Brooklyn-Queens line the third in New York City equipped with the technology.

The agreement, which is likely to be approved at the MTA’s board meeting on Wednesday, stipulates the work should be done in just shy of five years. The new signaling system will run the length of the train’s route from Court Square in Long Island City, Queens to Church Avenue in Kensington, Brooklyn.

The contract is set to be awarded to Crosstown Partners, a consortium of Long Island-based electric contractor TC Electric LLC and French transit communications company Thales Group. The contract allows the execution of $53 million in expansion options, and also includes a separate $37 million agreement with Thales to maintain the signal system for 25 years.

The G would join the L and 7 trains as the only lines fully equipped with the modern signaling tech, replacing Great Depression-era analog signals with wireless communication arrays that enable the MTA to run trains closer together, and hence, run more trains period.

On-time performance has jumped significantly on both the L and 7 in the years since becoming CBTC-equipped.

The agency is also in the process of implementing CBTC on parts of other lines, including the A/C in lower Manhattan, and the E/F/M/R in the easternmost stretches of the Queens Boulevard line, and on the F in southern Brooklyn; for the latter, the end of the CBTC-enabled G at Church Avenue will also mark the beginning of the CBTC-equipped F line, which is having the technology installed from Kensington to Coney Island.

MTA honchos say the G will be the first CBTC installation using a new project delivery method emphasizing the principle of “design-build,” where design and construction is melded in the same contract, consolidating accountability and lessening risk of failure. Design-build was previously employed by the MTA for the reconstruction of the L train’s East River tunnels and to expand accessibility at subway stations.

MTA Construction & Development President Jamie Torres-Springer says the new system will treat CBTC installation as a technology, rather than construction, project.

“This project will be the first that implements those principles,” said Torres-Springer at the MTA’s Capital Program Committee on Monday,” with simpler specs and new milestones in place that treat this as the technology project that it is. We’re continuing to build on the CBTC program.”

Long described in the media as the “stepchild” of the subway system, the G train is the only route not to enter Manhattan and features trains with fewer cars than other lines. The New York Times in 2008 described the G as “that unwanted drunk uncle everyone has. It’s embarrassing and awkward and doesn’t quite behave like it’s supposed to, but you keep it around because, well, it’s family.”

Its reputation has changed considerably in the intervening years with the rapid gentrification of the G’s corridor in Brooklyn, with the Times in 2016 deeming the line “cool, kind of.”

 

After reading what RTOMan said about Culver CBTC having the wrong track specs, this aint gonna be finished until like 2035 the earliest lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 12/20/2022 at 5:43 PM, Vulturious said:

https://www.amny.com/transit/mta-contract-modernize-g-line-signals/

After reading what RTOMan said about Culver CBTC having the wrong track specs, this aint gonna be finished until like 2035 the earliest lol.

I don’t understand. Why are they prioritizing the G for CBTC? They don’t run that many trains outside of the portion where it runs with the F

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, LexAveExp5 said:

I don’t understand. Why are they prioritizing the G for CBTC? They don’t run that many trains outside of the portion where it runs with the F

Your guess is just as good as mine, I have a few ideas as to why they want to do this:

  • The (G) is already fully NTT's (so is Eastern Division so that's out the window)
  • The IND signal systems especially for Crosstown is very old (I heard this from someone so I do not know if this is true)
  • The (G) could see a fleet expansion???? This one is just a guess, but it's not far fetched seeing as the R211's are if I'm not mistaken going to expand the fleet so maybe the (G) might see some length increase for the trains running around on it. 
  • One other reason I could think of is the (G) is already between 2 separate CBTC territories that being BMT Culver and IND QBL. This also has to do with the (F) already going through CBTC territory so it benefits that line, too. 

I don't know, these are just guesses so don't take my word for it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Vulturious said:

Your guess is just as good as mine, I have a few ideas as to why they want to do this:

  • The (G) is already fully NTT's (so is Eastern Division so that's out the window)
  • The IND signal systems especially for Crosstown is very old (I heard this from someone so I do not know if this is true)
  • The (G) could see a fleet expansion???? This one is just a guess, but it's not far fetched seeing as the R211's are if I'm not mistaken going to expand the fleet so maybe the (G) might see some length increase for the trains running around on it. 
  • One other reason I could think of is the (G) is already between 2 separate CBTC territories that being BMT Culver and IND QBL. This also has to do with the (F) already going through CBTC territory so it benefits that line, too. 

I don't know, these are just guesses so don't take my word for it. 

It’s the signaling system - it was installed at the same time as Queens Blvd, and being sandwiched between two CBTC corridors…not much of a choice 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With (G) getting CBTC,  will they be able/willing to extend it to Queens Plaza, Forest Hills or 179th? Especially when the (M) is not present along QB?

Also, have they contemplated more frequent OPTO (G) service to enable Express (F) service with Bergen lower re-opened?

Has, CBTC helped with the Continental Conga line?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/30/2022 at 5:56 AM, N6 Limited said:

With (G) getting CBTC,  will they be able/willing to extend it to Queens Plaza, Forest Hills or 179th? Especially when the (M) is not present along QB?

Also, have they contemplated more frequent OPTO (G) service to enable Express (F) service with Bergen lower re-opened?

Has, CBTC helped with the Continental Conga line?

The Conga line happens mostly when there's a non reporting train out there.. 

Or if a Zone controller takes a dump....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, RTOMan said:

The Conga line happens mostly when there's a non reporting train out there.. 

Or if a Zone controller takes a dump....

Ok, I was wondering because I've had experiences In the evening, where it’s quicker to backtrack from Woodhaven Blvd to Roosevelt to catch  the (E) or (F) to Jamaica than to take the local to 71st and transfer there. I could only imagine the frustration of those that live at the last 2-3 local stations.

Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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