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  
Deucey

Is there a list or map of switches that have been removed?

Recommended Posts

Seems with all the major reroutes when something goes wrong, that some of the removed switches could've been useful - if they were previously in the right (strategic) locations...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly there have been very few switch removals over the years. Many areas have in fact gained capability -- 125th (A)(B)(C)(D) and 4th/9th Culver come to mind. 

That said, there are a few areas where switch removal has hindered flexibility. The three that immediately come to mind are:

- the crossovers west of Hoyt on IRT EPW, which at one time allowed Lex trains to serve the station. 

- the crossovers at Freeman St on IRT White Plains which punctuated the otherwise enormous express section.

- the crossovers between the southbound tracks south of Broadway Lafayette St (IND). (To be fair, this removal was necessitated by the construction of the Chrystie ramp to/from the Manhattan Bridge, but the function was not duplicated in any new switch north of the station. Today, that lack of crossover capability south of W4 on s/b 6th forces insanely complex changes whenever express trains need to do more than run local from 34 to W4 -- think Culver swap and (E) via (R)

The more interesting examination IMO is that of crossover provisions. Especially on the IND, many spaces were left for switches -- and yet they were never installed. I'd love to see crossovers installed in the provisions south of 96/CPW, for example...

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RR503 said:

Honestly there have been very few switch removals over the years. Many areas have in fact gained capability -- 125th (A)(B)(C)(D) and 4th/9th Culver come to mind. 

That said, there are a few areas where switch removal has hindered flexibility. The three that immediately come to mind are:

- the crossovers west of Hoyt on IRT EPW, which at one time allowed Lex trains to serve the station. 

- the crossovers at Freeman St on IRT White Plains which punctuated the otherwise enormous express section.

- the crossovers between the southbound tracks south of Broadway Lafayette St (IND). (To be fair, this removal was necessitated by the construction of the Chrystie ramp to/from the Manhattan Bridge, but the function was not duplicated in any new switch north of the station. Today, that lack of crossover capability south of W4 on s/b 6th forces insanely complex changes whenever express trains need to do more than run local from 34 to W4 -- think Culver swap and (E) via (R)

The more interesting examination IMO is that of crossover provisions. Especially on the IND, many spaces were left for switches -- and yet they were never installed. I'd love to see crossovers installed in the provisions south of 96/CPW, for example...

Not to derail, but is there a map of said provisions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RR503 said:

I'd love to see crossovers installed in the provisions south of 96/CPW, for example...

Would prefer to skip more stops instead of a quasi-express during track work. Gotta make up for the time going through slow zones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RR503 said:

Honestly there have been very few switch removals over the years. Many areas have in fact gained capability -- 125th (A)(B)(C)(D) and 4th/9th Culver come to mind. 

That said, there are a few areas where switch removal has hindered flexibility. The three that immediately come to mind are:

- the crossovers west of Hoyt on IRT EPW, which at one time allowed Lex trains to serve the station. 

- the crossovers at Freeman St on IRT White Plains which punctuated the otherwise enormous express section.

- the crossovers between the southbound tracks south of Broadway Lafayette St (IND). (To be fair, this removal was necessitated by the construction of the Chrystie ramp to/from the Manhattan Bridge, but the function was not duplicated in any new switch north of the station. Today, that lack of crossover capability south of W4 on s/b 6th forces insanely complex changes whenever express trains need to do more than run local from 34 to W4 -- think Culver swap and (E) via (R)

The more interesting examination IMO is that of crossover provisions. Especially on the IND, many spaces were left for switches -- and yet they were never installed. I'd love to see crossovers installed in the provisions south of 96/CPW, for example...

There are provisions at 23rd Street on the Eighth Avenue Line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should have left the switches between Nassau and the Bridge to allow special (J) trains to take over any of the Coney Island bound routes in case of an emergency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CDTA said:

Not to derail, but is there a map of said provisions?

Vanshnook has a few marked on his track map, but the vast majority have to be seen via RFW. I don’t think a map exists...

50 minutes ago, CenSin said:

Would prefer to skip more stops instead of a quasi-express during track work. Gotta make up for the time going through slow zones.

Maybe it is better to go full express (a question for a ridership benefitted x mins saved - ridership inconvenienced x mins lost analysis imo) but I’d like the option to be there. That is a massive express segment, and 72 spur isn’t well located to mitigate that. I think that such a crossover would really come into play during disruptions —normal coverage would be maximized and backriding reduced. 

6 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

They should have left the switches between Nassau and the Bridge to allow special (J) trains to take over any of the Coney Island bound routes in case of an emergency.

Do you realize how much trackwork for a flat junction would cost to maintain? If you’re creative, you can preserve full, single line service on all 4 BMT Southern div trunks with any two Manhattan Bound tracks out. I see no reason that this would be necessary. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RR503 said:

Vanshnook has a few marked on his track map, but the vast majority have to be seen via RFW. I don’t think a map exists...

Maybe it is better to go full express (a question for a ridership benefitted x mins saved - ridership inconvenienced x mins lost analysis imo) but I’d like the option to be there. That is a massive express segment, and 72 spur isn’t well located to mitigate that. I think that such a crossover would really come into play during disruptions —normal coverage would be maximized and backriding reduced. 

Do you realize how much trackwork for a flat junction would cost to maintain? If you’re creative, you can preserve full, single line service on all 4 BMT Southern div trunks with any two Manhattan Bound tracks out. I see no reason that this would be necessary. 

It was just a thought...trying to understand how these things work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Provisions at Church Avenue will be used to replace Ditmas interlocking. They aren't perfect diamond crossovers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, CDTA said:

Not to derail, but is there a map of said provisions?

As others have mentioned, this here should be it.

For those interested, there's a website that has track maps of train systems from around the world and all of them contain provisions (it's in French; fortunately there's a option to translate to English). 

10 minutes ago, Union Tpke said:

Provisions at Church Avenue will be used to replace Ditmas interlocking. They aren't perfect diamond crossovers.

That's because Ditmas interlocking is a leftover of what used to be the turn to the original Culver line. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, TheNewYorkElevated said:

As others have mentioned, this here should be it.

For those interested, there's a website that has track maps of train systems from around the world and all of them contain provisions (it's in French; fortunately there's a option to translate to English). 

That's because Ditmas interlocking is a leftover of what used to be the turn to the original Culver line. 

Incorrect. Ditmas was rebuilt the way it is as part of the Culver Ramp. A fourth track was added on part of the old structure.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Union Tpke said:

Provisions at Church Avenue will be used to replace Ditmas interlocking. They aren't perfect diamond crossovers.

Interestingly, I’ve heard not all the new switches will be simple diamonds either — on the n/b tracks they’ll use both provisions to make single crossovers.

44 minutes ago, TheNewYorkElevated said:

That's because Ditmas interlocking is a leftover of what used to be the turn to the original Culver line. 

I believe the part that’s being supplanted isn’t the 4->3 track merge area, but the crossovers between 18th and Ditmas used most recently for the Culver station rehabs. If they end up removing those switches by 18th entirely, though, I hope they preserve the option of reinstalling in the future — 18th could be a great terminal for the (G)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, RR503 said:

Interestingly, I’ve heard not all the new switches will be simple diamonds either — on the n/b tracks they’ll use both provisions to make single crossovers.

Tell me more. It sounds like they are installing new switches north of Ditmas Avenue to replace the old ones in the immediate vicinity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, CenSin said:

Tell me more. It sounds like they are installing new switches north of Ditmas Avenue to replace the old ones in the immediate vicinity?

Yes -- they're either supplementing or fully replacing (not sure which -- @Union Tpke may know more) these switches with ones underground between Church and Ditmas. Unsure of project timeline, but it's certainly on the books as something they wish to do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, RR503 said:

Yes -- they're either supplementing or fully replacing (not sure which -- @Union Tpke may know more) these switches with ones underground between Church and Ditmas. Unsure of project timeline, but it's certainly on the books as something they wish to do. 

The switches between Ditmas Avenue and 18 Avenue were pretty crappy anyway. Church Avenue should have always been the ideal location to place them given the layout of the tracks and platforms. Service reroutes could also have Ditmas Avenue be bypassed without bypassing all of the local stations between Smith–9 Streets and Church Avenue.

One wonders what kind of thinking could have caused this awkward setup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To answer your question @Deucey, occasionally, the ERA Bulletin will illustrate track layouts of the subway (existing and since demolished), which includes switches and tracks that were added and/or removed over the years. It's just a matter of combing through the articles to find what you're looking for.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, RR503 said:

Yes -- they're either supplementing or fully replacing (not sure which -- @Union Tpke may know more) these switches with ones underground between Church and Ditmas. Unsure of project timeline, but it's certainly on the books as something they wish to do. 

I don't know all the details, but I know some switches be added at 18th Avenue as part of the project. The Interlocking at Kings Highway will be rebuilt first, and work will go north from there. By having the switches underground at Church Avenue, they won't face the elements, which should reduce problems.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were two switches south of the Fordham Road (B)(D) station that seemed to allow downtown express trains to switch to the local track, and local northbound trains to switch to the express track. You can see the outline of where they used to be on the approach to the station. These two probably weren't that crucial to service, but I felt that i'd throw them in the mix.

Edited by Cabanamaner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Cabanamaner said:

There were two switches south of the Fordham Road (B)(D) station that seemed to allow downtown express trains to switch to the local track, and local northbound trains to switch to the express track. You can see the outline of where they used to be on the approach to the station. These two probably weren't that crucial to service, but I felt that i'd throw them in the mix.

Those were removed in 2004 as part of the line's resignaling.

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lance said:

To answer your question @Deucey, occasionally, the ERA Bulletin will illustrate track layouts of the subway (existing and since demolished), which includes switches and tracks that were added and/or removed over the years. It's just a matter of combing through the articles to find what you're looking for.

Here are some:

Lexington Avenue

LEXINGTON_NORTH.jpg

Lexington_south.jpg

Eighth Avenue

8thave_1.jpg8thAVENUE_2.jpg

Brighton

brighton1912.jpg

brighton_present.jpg

brightonpresentsouth.jpg

Culver

culversouth.jpg

SKMBT_culvershutt2.jpg

Brooklyn IRT:

 

http://tramway-null.blogspot.com/2013/05/dave-rogoffs-line-drawings-of-original.html

Edited by Union Tpke
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually the local track at Brooklyn Bridge used to connect with the express track after the station if I'm not mistaken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I looked at the maps, and I believe the southbound pocket track at Union Square was removed in 1991 after the Union Square Derailment that year. Am I correct?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Union Tpke said:

Culver

culversouth.jpg

 

This is just insane. Are there no historical documents that describe the reasoning behind these baffling changes?

Looking at the diagrams, one can trace the evolution of a once sensible arrangement into the one we have today (all right-hand switches from Avenue U to Ditmas Avenue going northbound, and scissor crossovers in the other direction).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a set of switches just west of 69 st on the (7) which allowed trains to occasionally terminate at 61st. They replaced it with the 74 st interlockings.

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.